JFK-AKL problem for Air NZ

This new nonstop service has had some issues since inaugurating a week ago. One flight did not bring checked baggage. Another came very close to needing fuel in Fiji. A third needed to offload 15 pax and their bags to load more fuel. More have been late than on time. All of this is due to operating the 789 at the very edge of its margins on the westbound track. The result has been lots of missed connections in AKL, including many to Oz ports, with those additional problems tacked on.

Part of the problem seems to be that Air NZ simply has too many seats on its 787s for such a long-haul flight. I think their 787s have close to 300 seats (compare with Qantas’ 787s which have 236 seats and which therefore take off lighter and have extra range).

Seems they might be blocking 50+ seats westbound and still not making it on some days without even less pax and more fuel. They chase the Australia market and indeed connecting in AKL for JFK is a much better proposition than LAX. But regularly missing connections on the way back does make that a bit of a farce.

Are they the same model type???

Same model different seating arrangements

Qantas had these problems initially with Dallas Sydney (similar distance); but worked it out with experience. Qantas will drop 50 seats westbound as well. I got three seats in economy recently on a ‘full’ flight. ANZ will sort it out with more conservative loading and routings.

News today: NZ will block an additional 35 seats westbound, load now capped at 180 pax. They took the decision to do this rather than accept diversions to Fiji. Seems the 15 pax recently offloaded at JFK scored US$1500 each plus free hotel.

Just makes better sense to stopover in LAX - at least your somewhat guaranteed to fly instead of playing the weather pattern lottery

@patrickk - er, not quite the 'same model'. Whilst they are both Boeing B787-9 frames, the Air New Zealand version are using Rolls Royce Trent engines, as opposed to the GE engines used on the Qantas models. Different performance characteristics .. and these were what kept ANZ frames grounded for some considerable time during 2020-2021.

That said, the difference is relatively minimal and unlikely to have any great meaningful difference, when you consider the stage length that ANZ is covering .. and the *excess* current number of seats. ANZ is reconfiguring these frames to update the seat design / quality - hence, also the revision on capacity to better align with the QF setup.

As @tommygun mentions, it will be interesting to see what the NZ actual seat capacity will be configured at, vs what is going to going to be blocked. ie: they might aim for 180 pax maximum. but does that mean a configuration of 180-190, or a config with approx 240 which has been thrown around for the B787-9 refits not on the NYC route? On a route like this, even carrying blocked (empty) seats has a weight disadvantage.

Given the relative commonality between the refitted ANZ model and the QF configuration, not to mention a similar passenger demographic and travel habits - I'd bet there will be quite a few other airlines watching to see how performance plays out between the two competitors once QF starts the AKL-JKF-AKL service.

Update: should a Fiji diversion be required it seems crew hours will expire and the aircraft will be stuck there. Air NZ appears willing to operate a "ghost" flight AKL-NAN in order to collect those pax rather than strand them. This has been done once already, although not required in the end.

Airlines fit the number of seats they feel they need for their market. Qantas is particularly premium heavy in seating. This way they can afford to fly with empty economy class seats. I was on a ‘full’ flight from Dallas a couple of months ago wth plenty of empty seats in economy.