Flights to Auckland, New Zealand

[rkacruiser]

Having booked the Statendam's February 18, 2006 cruise, I will need to fly to Auckland. From the research I have done, Air New Zealand and Quantas appear to be the two choices. I would sincerely appreciate learning of peoples' opinions about either of these airlines.

 

And, I would also appreciate learning opinions about whether Business Class or First Class is worth the money as opposed to Economy Class.

 

It appears that Air New Zealand will be upgrading their First Class cabin, dropping that name and calling it "Business Premier" with sleeper seats in the coming months. Any experiences with this type of seating?

 

Many thanks for your opinions and experiences!!

 

Bob

[Globaliser]

From the research I have done, Air New Zealand and Quantas appear to be the two choices. I would sincerely appreciate learning of peoples' opinions about either of these airlines.

First thing you might want to note: Qantas has no "u" in its name.

 

If you're used to US airlines, you won't have any problems with either of these airlines. Both will probably look after you well, and they should both be a significant step up from what you'll get on US airlines.

 

I do a lot of flying with Qantas (in economy) and have got used to its quirks. The weakest part of the Qantas experience, IMO, is the cabin crew attitude. But the rest of the product is consistently good and efficient, and I have no problems with hauling myself from London to Australia and back two or three times a year (about 22-23 hours each way).

 

Air New Zealand used to have a very high reputation in economy, but it has reportedly become quite tired. One of its selling points is, IIRC, that the seat pitch in economy is a little deeper than standard so you may have an extra couple of inches of space. The cabin refurbishment programme that will soon start will improve the hardware and may have an effect on improving the rest of the experience, but I don't know whether it's going to move fast enough for you to be guaranteed the new cabin by next February. I haven't flown NZ internationally for some years now so I can't do a direct comparison.

And, I would also appreciate learning opinions about whether Business Class or First Class is worth the money as opposed to Economy Class.

As always, it depends on the money it's going to cost you, and the money you have to spend. Myself, I'd rather go to Oz three times in economy than once in business class - but that's because every penny is coming out of my own pocket. But if you're not used to ultra long-haul flying, you like your creature comforts and you can afford it, then business class is a nice way to travel. I've never done first, so can't speak about this at all.

It appears that Air New Zealand will be upgrading their First Class cabin, dropping that name and calling it "Business Premier" with sleeper seats in the coming months. Any experiences with this type of seating?

Actually, the first class cabin will be dropped, not upgraded. It's the businss class cabin that's going to be upgraded. It's not going to be a first class product nor will it pretend to be, although it will be better than many airlines' business class products. The word is that the seats to be used are very similar to those used by Virgin Atlantic in its business class cabin ("Upper Class"). Most people seem reasonably happy with them, although there are some people who don't like them and prefer (for example) British Airways' business class beds.

[kitty9]

I flew Qantas to Sydney in first class, and while it was nice, I much prefer British Air because of their first class seats. Those seats fully recline and you almost feel you're in your own little space because the way the seat is designed. But, Qantas did have nice and spacious seats in FC and the meal service was actually quite good. If you book through United, they have a code share with Air New Zealand. That might be a way for you to use any FF miles.

[Globaliser]

I flew Qantas to Sydney in first class, and while it was nice, I much prefer British Air because of their first class seats. Those seats fully recline and you almost feel you're in your own little space because the way the seat is designed. But, Qantas did have nice and spacious seats in FC and the meal service was actually quite good.

Was that a few years ago now?

 

First class on British Airways (not "British Air") has fully reclining seats in suites - they are flat and horizontal and the suite design offers a great deal of privacy. First class on Qantas now uses very similar seats, although the layout is more conventional and offers slightly less privacy.

 

Business class on BA also now has fully reclining seats, which go both flat and horizontal. There are few business class seats that do this, although the disadvantage is that in order to maintain the seating density these seats are narrower than some other business class seats.

 

Business class on Qantas has been almost fully fitted with flat "Skybed" seats, although these are flat-at-an-angle when they are fully reclined, which is the conventional arrangement on those airlines with flat business class seats. Obviously, they are wider than the BA seats, but they are not horizontal when fully reclined.

[kitty9]

I beg your profound forgiveness for not naming BA by their correct name as British Airways. You seem to have a strong propensity for correcting spelling and incorrect corporate naming. I have flown BA first class 6 times out of Chicago, the last being the summer of 2004. They do have their reclining seats, single seats by the window, and two-by-two in the middle seats. I do not like the way their business class (Club World) is configured with seats facing each other and the little "fan" separating the seats. It's terribly inconvient to have to climb over other passengers to get to the loo when their seats are reclined and that's exactly what passengers in A, E, F and K seats have to do.

 

My Qantas flight was in 2001, and at that time they were not the type of seats BA (British Airways) has had for a number of years past---they were the same basic first class seats offered by United, NWA or Delta. That is why I chose BA over Virgin Atlantic. On my VA flight a few year's ago, before they left the Chicago market, I didn't think their Upper Class compared to BA--not for first class or Club World. It was touted as a truly first class experience, but it was no better than business class on any US airline.

[Globaliser]

I beg your profound forgiveness for not naming BA by their correct name as British Airways. You seem to have a strong propensity for correcting spelling and incorrect corporate naming.

If I'd got it wrong, I'd welcome being put right. But then perhaps there's a reason why http://www.quantas.com redirects to Qantas' US site.

[vivian02]

Good information here. I am the guy in the back flying economy because I have a budget but here is a word of warning flying to Auckland. There are some very reasonable priced airfares to Auckland but I do remember seeing this flight route on one of the carriers that goes something like this: LAX to PPT to AKL. It looks good until you find out you Arrive in PPT at 2:00 "AM". The next connecting flight leaves PPT around noon. I thought I had a great deal going until I check out how much it would cost for a hotel room. Extemely high in price. I think that flight was on AMZ. There is good information coming out here, lets keep it coming. Tim

[turtlemichael]

I don't think Globaliser meant any offence in his two corrections.

 

I have to admit that I get marginally irritated by the mispelling of Qantas. It's a national icon akin to the Grand Kanyon!!!! It's an easy thing to do and it's nice to be gently corrected as Globaliser did.

 

Same goes for pronunciation. I would never have known that Houston the city was pronounced differently from Houston the Manhattan street unless someone had told me. :o

[rkacruiser]

Are there any other airlines other than Air New Zealand and Qantas that fly non-stop from the United States to Auckland?

[turtlemichael]

Are there any other airlines other than Air New Zealand and Qantas that fly non-stop from the United States to Auckland?

 

They are the only ones. There are daily flights on Qantas and Air New Zealand. United code shares with Air New Zealand and American with Qantas.

 

Air Tahiti flies but has a stop in Papeete (worse things could happen than having to stop and stay in Tahiti even if the connections are poor and hotels not cheap!) :)

 

My experience of both NZ and QF is that they are much superior to US airlines in Business Class on international routes and also domestically. I have not flown First on NZ but the Qantas First product I felt was excellent.

[vivian02]

I think the might be an Air France Flight. Tim

[Globaliser]

I think the might be an Air France Flight.

If there ever was, there isn't any more. AF still flies to Tahiti though.

[rkacruiser]

Thank you very much for the information. From the research I have done, it appeared that Qantas and Air New Zealand were the only ones flying non-stop to Auckland from the U.S. I just wanted to check to make certain that somehow I had not overlooked an airline.

 

When Holland America positions the Statendam in Australia and New Zealand for several voyages in 2006 and 2007, given the small number of daily flights going there, it would be my guess that they are going to have to use charter airlines to fly many of their passengers there. Any thoughts about this possibility?

[Kiwifruit]

QF (Qantas) and NZ (Air New Zealand) are the only airlines offering direct flights between LAX and AKL. NZ also now offers a direct service between SFO-AKL, and depending on where you originate from, this maybe a prefered option as it allows you to avoid the poor excuse for an international airport that is LAX.

 

I have travelled extensively on both QF and NZ and both are good. While in terms of service and food quality both airlines rate highly, particularly when compared to North American airlines, at present QF has a slight advantage in terms of seating on the LAX-AKL route. The good news is that by the time you travel both airlines will have improved their business class product. QF will operate 744 aircraft with their new "skybed" and NZ will have introduced its new Business Premier class. However, neither airline offer first class on this direct route. The business class seat to be used on NZ is the same flat bed seat used by Virgin in its upper class and has got good reviews. This may give NZ a slight advantage over the QF skybed which is not fully flat but has a slight incline. If I were choosing between the two airlines I would probably be dictated by price and the Frequent Flyer Programme that you favour. (QF is associated with AA, NZ with UA).

 

If you have the time, you may also wish to consider stopping in the pacific islands en route. NZ operates indirect flights from LAX via a number of pacific islands (although the aircraft operating on these routes will not have the updated business class product offered on the direct flights from LAX and SFO), Air Tahiti Nui offers fares from LAX to AKL via Papeete (Tahiti), and Air Pacific offers fares from LAX to AKL via Nadi (Fiji).

 

In answer to your query as to whether it is worth paying the extra for business class, if you have the money I would pay the extra as on those long overnight flights being able to sleep lying down makes all the difference. It ia also worth noting that February is peak season for travellers flying to Australia/NZ from North America so it is likely the planes will be quite full when you fly and the extra space and comfort offered by business class is welcome. I understand NZ may release some promotional fares for release of its new business class product though they may not be available during peak season, nevertheless I suggest you keep looking out for them.

[Kiwifruit]

PS While QF and NZ are the only airlines flying direct between North America and AKL I very much doubt it would be necessary to operate charter aircraft in order to meet the demands of cruise passengers. There are many indirect routings for flying to AKL from North America via the Pacific Islands or Australia. I'm sure that both QF and NZ also have the ability to increase capacity on this route should it prove necessary as they are constantly monitoring loadings and often introduce new capacity where they see a demand.

[boards]

Is November a good time to travel to Australia or New Zealand? The Hal offerings of early in the year and late we are looking into a Nov or Dec sailing. My wife wants travel to Australia and I am wondering if a cruise would do justice to a trip there?

[turtlemichael]

Boards,

 

Any month is a good month to come to Australia and New Zealand! November is Spring and you'll find it a little cooler in NZ and a touch warmer in Aus. The average maximum temperature in Auckland then is 66F, Sydney 75F and Cairns where I am in the tropics 87F. Rainfall is light.

 

PS Hi Kiwifruit, long time no see, drop an email some time!

[kitty9]

I think anytime you can go to Australia, is a great time. That country is a little bit if God's paradise and well worth the flight. I cannot wait to go back and experience her incredibly warm and friendly people, the great places to visit and the wonderful wildlife. It was my dream trip and it was all I anticipated it to be.

[Kiwifruit]

Boards,

 

Whilst cruises are great, you only get to stay in each port for a day so they can never really allow you to get to know a destination. This is particularly so for Australia which is larger in area than mainland USA (excluding Alaska). A cruise will only give you a taste of the what is a small part of Australia so I definitely recommend allowing time before or after the cruise to explore the country a little more.

 

November is not a bad time to visit though the weather can be a little unreliable particularly in NZ but nonetheless would seem quite tropical for you from what I remember of Toronto in November ;-)

 

PS Turtle, hope you weren't effected too badly by the cyclone?. I'll drop you an email.

[rkacruiser]

Many thanks for a very informative reply to my questions! The information you have supplied is most helpful. I am leaning towards trying to fly the trans-Pacific portion of the journey out of SFO. I, too, think that might be a better airport to use than LAX.

[rkacruiser]

One of the attractions for me to Holland America's New Zealand/Australia cruise itineraries is all the ports that are included in New Zealand. Plus, as has been pointed out, one also gets a "taste" of some Australian ports. I visited Auckland and Bay of Islands along with Sydney, Cairns, Darwin, and Broome in Australia on the Volendam's Asia Pacific cruise in 2002 and have been looking for an itinerary much like what HAL is offering for 2006. Both countries were very interesting and I want to see more!

 

These 2006 cruises should be good ones!

[Kiwifruit]

Bob,

 

I'm sure you will have a great time exploring NZ, it really is one of the most scenic places on earth (but then again being a kiwi I am not entirely impartial ;-). Being a small narrow country with a long coastline it really lends itself to cruising and I'm sure it would be spectacular to cruise into Milford Sound on a large cruise liner.

 

Don't hesitate to let me know if you have any further queries.

[rkacruiser]

Many thanks, Kiwifruit, for your offer to answer questions. As the time approaches for my journey, I have no doubt that some questions will occur. I will post whatever I may have on this Message Board under this thread and on the Australia/New Zealand Board as well.

 

Bob