bottoms up

So looks like Houston drew first blood with the IAH-AKL route. After Jeff announced we were canceling the IAH-AKL route a few years ago (which was right after they announced that SWA could fly into from HOU) houston decided to let Air New Zealand come on in.

I think mayor Anise Parker and Jeff are not exchanging Christmas cards

Here is a link from a few years ago about us canceling
United cancels Boeing 787-based Houston-Auckland route - Australian Business Traveller

And here is the announcement from today with Air NZ
Air New Zealand extends IAH's global reach - Houston Chronicle

Or maybe that's just more of letting in alliance partners so we can start shrinking.

cadetdrivr

If anybody thinks that ANZ did not make this route selection in direct cooperation with UAL then I'd like to sell them a bridge.

(Hint: ANZ is a fairly small airline from a pretty small country that happens to have a robust tourism industry. The primary reason to add IAH is its status as a major UA/STAR hub that offers hundreds of connections.)

bottoms up

When 787 was announced we initially had iah-akl on the books. Once SWA was given approval to build the customs in hou and fly intl from there we canceled IAH-AkL. Now instead of UAL doing the fling NZ will be doing it under codeshare.
You may have missed that if you weren't living in Tx and up to date on the news. It was within a few day of each other

If you don't think that houston isn't ****ed at UAL for moving HQ to Chicago then I have some ocean front property to sell in AZ

Hint: I'm sure they made that route with UAL approval, however that is a route that should be flown by UAL pilots. Not NZ!

But what do I know

cadetdrivr

Actually I followed the news quite closely as I vacation in NZ regularly and miss the direct UA flights to AKL.

While I have no doubt that Houston and UA have significant issues, if they really wanted to mess with UA it would not involve cooperating to add a flight with a UA STAR partner.

Besides, UA "canceling" the previously announced IAH-AKL route could have had nothing to do with the fact that the 787 did not have the required extended ETOPS certification for IAH-AKL at the time of service entry, huh? (Without it, the route would have had to take a far more circuitous route around the south Pacific ETOPS "hole".)

I'm not surprised that UA did not emphasize Boeing's teething problems with the shiny new airplane in the press.

On one thing we do agree: this is a route that should be flown with UA metal and pilots.

dvhighdrive88

Try not to make to much sense, your talking to pilots.....

bottoms up

Even with 180 Etops the 787-9 can do this now. Seeing how this route doesn't start until dec still little odd that we aren't doing this. Still getting 1 787 per month 2 in some later months. 25th first Q of 2016 as of last update

cadetdrivr

Yup. This should be a UA route.

Rumor in the NZ press suggests that UA could start an additional STAR frequency on SFO-AKL with the 787 so it would not surprise me if it turns out that UA & ANZ decided to split the pie a little differently. Time will tell.

Got scope?