Air New Zealand will be introducing what’s arguably the biggest innovation we’ve ever seen in economy, even if only very few passengers will be able to enjoy this. The airline will be introducing bunk beds in economy, which is something we’ve never seen before.
Continue reading: Air New Zealand Skynest: $495 Economy Bunk Beds Rolling Out Soon On 787s
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
Kudos to NZ for being innovative. Really, hats off.
I wonder whether one would be able to book it twice, one after another.
That's really creative. Wish more airlines would try new things, especially to make things more comfortable in Economy. Air NZ flies some seriously LONG-haul flights, like AKL-JFK, so good to see.
Outside of a few insufferable “influencers” at product launch, nobody is going to pay that. Maybe if it covered the entire flight.
I love the idea, but I feel like 4 hours is a bit low IMO. IIRC, 4 hours is generally the minimum time to get through the first nighttime sleep cycle, so really it means no real time to fall asleep.
5-6 would likely be much better, IMO, although NZ may not have felt they could charge enough to only have 3 turns on the JFK flight.
That's very cool to see this coming to life! Pricing is a little steep, but if I can't get a business class seat with points or an upgrade, and i really have no other option than doing the flight in economy, then I think I'd happily pay for that, especially if I can get 4 hours in the middle of the flight as a break from the economy seat.
Yeah -- I feel like the value here is on an ultra-long flight, trying to actually get something like a real night's length rest, which 4 hours is not. Pricing seems crazy to me when you could, presumably, get an extra legroom seat in economy for like $200 for the whole flight. (Perhaps it's more?)
Business Class for poor people. Lol. Must suck to not have money to fly like a human.
Nope to the Nest. Four hours would only give me a headache and I don't want to smell farts. Being a small person, the couch might be a better choice, but only if there was nothing else.
If in the middle, why in V shape? It will only make heads closer, snores will be heard louder. Could do it in parallel. When they first announced V shape, I imagined it is in the very back of the cabin converting otherwise dead space into beds.
If they could solve the take off and landing safety issues, I like the space math. Six Y seats turn into 6 full-sized bunks. I'd happily fly 14 plus hours in a bunk like that than in a typical Y seat (I think). Or sell me and a companion one seat and one bunk for the entire flight, and we can switch as we like (and I mean switch, not share).
My concern would be the inconsiderate in the enclosed space (e. g., tablet without headphones, laughing, stinky etc.) and those who aren't inconsiderate, but annoying (e. g., snorers).
Can you book more than one block? 8 uninterrupted hours could easily be worth an extra $1000. Especially when you compare it to the buy up to business class.
hmm, call me poor but I rather save $495 for 2 or 3 decent hotel nights so I can actually sleep during my trip 🙂
Their mistake is to put a 5'2'' 110 lbs. model in the marketing pictures.
They really need to put Maori sized models to show how this won't work.
Typical NZ racism.
While people pay $200 for an extra 4 inch for 12 hours that's equal to paying $4000 for 80 inch this is offering.
According to you,
People are either just dumb to pay for extra 4" or just dumb at math.
Call me rich but I rather save 2 or 3 decent productive days for $495 so I don't actually need extra sleep during my trip 😉
The bunks are 80″ long, so I imagine there's a space factor at play to avoid removing more seats than necessary
The flying public has no one to blame but themselves.
Assuming 1990 is your birth year, you probably wouldn't remember most of this, but from Deregulation (1978) through the early 2000s, airlines actually experimented a lot with different coach configurations/offerings. The most famous was probably American's "More Room Throughout Coach."
But the consistent outcome, was that every time one deviated from the "pack as many seats as possible" model, they LOST TONS OF MONEY doing it. So they simply quit doing anything else.
The flying public taught the airlines, through its purchase actions, that no matter how much it whines/cries/farts/yells/screams about the conditions of economy class: lower prices will always rule the day.
I admire NZ for innovating in Y which no other airline do outside of improved tech. This seems like it could work especially at that point in the flight in long haul Y where you just desperately want to lay down for a little bit and 4 hours sound like enough time to take a solid nap. Pricing seems reasonable too.
I'm curious about how turbulence would affect the actual amount of time passengers would have on a bunk bed, as well as the turnaround times between passengers.
Looking at the bunk set-up, all I can think of is the Three Stooges short "A Pain in the Pullman"...
Instead of worrying about woke airlines you should focus on your grammar. Who the f says “Wouldn’t never”
But you wouldn’t get 8 uninterrupted hours because all the lights come on and the crew changes all the linens every 4-hours. The only this would work is if all 6 passengers booked 8-hours also.
You guys are poor, I would rather spend 3K on Biz class, so I get all flight of sleep, plus no poor people around me.
Skycouch is NZD500 at the airport if available - its a much better sleep and all yours.
Fun with math... NZ loses 6 seats of regular Y and gains 6 bunks. So, each bunk needs to replace one Y pax fare. Each bunk generates US$990 per leg based on the reported US$495 per each of two (initial rollout), four-hour periods. (I'll assume bunks sell out always.) The AKL-LAX fare is $625 to $875 each way based on a Y r/t purchase (Nov versus Jan used). So, OK, bunks pay for themselves (ignoring differences in cost to install and operate).
But, first use is on AKL-JFK, with a $1250 each way on r/t purchase (used Jan dates). Thus, unless or until they can scale to three, four-hour rounds (at $495×3=$1485) on this >15 hour flight, they'd be losing money, iff, they could have sold the 6 removed seats at regular Y fare. Once you get three turns, it's a winner.
But, the basic math isn't crazy, since you can look at this as losing the "last 6 Y seats sold."
I wonder if they staged the pillows that way so they could get the picture. Seems like it would make a lot more sense for ppls’ heads to be as far away as possible. The only issue I can think of is potential noise from the cabin, but you’ve got earplugs.
Even if they do intend to use it this way, I don’t see why you couldn’t just sleep facing the other way.
Good point. For some reason I imagined everyone was on a staggered schedule and the crew reset the beds one at a time. But yeah, your way makes way more sense
Yup. Plus I can see a lot of ppl choosing to fly them over another carrier bc of this option. In that sense, it’s a moneymaker.
Do you mean you think the crew would make ppl get up and go back to their seats for turbulence? I can see that being a pretty big downside (get woken up after an hour, then can’t fall asleep again in your little coffin bunk).
I can see that happening too, JJ. And in the unlikely event that it's a flop, they can always replace it with seats, probably in a day.
Other than the snoring and farting that happens in every cabin class, at least.
Speaking of creative seating configurations, I recall the 2-5-2 on DC-10, MD-11, which was ‘fun’ to be stuck in the middle-middle
I don't think J demand is at risk here, with the 4-hour time limit (even if you could reserve 2 back to back of those). I think it could be a risk to J for trans-Atlantic flights if other carriers opted to add these. I don't expect they would. They'd get just one 4-hour (or more) cycle per trip. Thus, they'd have to charge a Y fare for your seat and an equal amount for the bunk. But, would pax pay 2×Y for a Y seat with 4+ hours of bunk over J for people who would buy J if no bunks existed? I'd predict a lot of yesses for TATL and very few for long-haul NZ flights (or equivalent).
The sky couch has a specialized "belt" to use while sleeping that avoids the "fasten seatbelt" issue. A quick look at the photos suggests there is an equivalent here. I'm guessing something like what they use for people in stretchers, but less "aggressive" in appearance and restriction.
Your guess... etc.
But, I'd speculate they'll be fully reserved initially (duh). This is going on a 787 with 246 Y and PE seats now. Remove 6 seats for 6 bunks, and you have a potential (Y/PE) pax to bunk ratio of 240:6. Thus, only 1 of 40 (on a full flight) can be in a bunk at a time. Thus, 1 in 20 for two "shifts." And, 1 in 13 when there are three shifts. I think those ratios work well for the demand side. No expert I am.
@ImmortalSynn. It is nice to see someone who has figured out WE (traveling public, not just us here) are cause of low-pitch and the like. AA experiment is the prime example. It is encouraging to note that carriers have found PE as a growing market. But, the market must be frustrating. XX will pull 10% of the seats out of their planes. Pax avoid them because they want $195 in airfare while others charge $180. [No, I didn't goof up the math. I'd have to charge $200 with 90% of the seats if planes had 100% load capacity and there were no savings in weight. Neither are expected to hold.]
I looked into this. Many sources use the US$495 number, explicitly use US$s. Don't know for sure.
$495 for 4 hrs in a claustrophobic space seems high. We will see ow this works out.
New Zealand media is reporting $495 NZD and this can be confirmed on Air NZ's website: https://www.airnewzealandnewsroom.com/press-release-2026-the-future-of-long-haul-travel-air-new-zealands-economy-skynest-on-sale-from-may-2026
Looked it up. Go from 31" to 35" in Y for NZ$179 each way (US$105). On a NZ$2700 (US$1600) r/t, who wouldn't pay the extra? [AKL-JFK n/s in October]
The have special restraints on the sky couch to avoid that. Look at the photos, they seem to have some here, too. So my guess is you stay during turbulence.
I really wonder what it's gonna be with meal times.. If I miss a meal during the 4h period in the bed, will I be fed later? Or, should I give up the meal and take the bed?
4h×2 is 8h, then I guess one of the time slots might be missing either a full meal or a snack.
I've gone ahead and verified that the Skynest is NZ$495 (US$289), not US$495. A dummy booking shows NZ$1,669 ($975) with no Skynest, and NZ$2,164 ($1,264) with a Skynest booking. That's a significantly different value proposition, though perhaps still a bit high for some for a four-hour slot.
I wonder what's going to happen during turbulence. Will passengers be allowed to stay "in bed"? More importantly, what if there's turbulence and beds cannot be prepared timely/at all for the 2nd/3rd round of passengers who may have already paid for their slot?
Anyone who calls themselves an Aviation Geek but doesn't jump at the chance of trying this or the previous sky couch is honestly just a poser who is just a luxury afficianado, not an aviation person.
The JFK-ATL flight is scheduled for 17h50. So try this:
0:00 depart
3:00 first meal complete
4:00 start shift one in bunk
8:00 end shift one/bunk cleaned
9:00 start shift two
13:00 end shift two
16:00 start arrival meal
17:50 arrive.
See, they easily miss the two "formal" meals. As you can see, you couldn't get three shifts in and not interfere with a formal meal.
There are special restraints in the bunks just for that. I've never had a long-haul TPAC that had enough turbulence fir long enough to prevent what I imagine are the minimal steps necessary to prepare the bunks.
Agreed. I think it's pretty cool when airlines try new products and services. Riding last-row, middle, no recline, next to the lav still gets the job done, but, also, let's be real, I'll never turn-down EK F.
Agreed. I think it's pretty cool when airlines try new products and services. Riding last-row, middle, no recline, next to the lav still gets the job done, but, also, let's be real, I'll never turn-down EK F.
How could I fall sleep knowing that I'm paying 2 dollars per minute on that bunk bed ?
Interesting way of looking at it. I did the calculation, and I pay $2.3 to $3 per minute to fly J TPAC. But, of course, that's paying for all minutes, take off to landing (based on r/t purchase).
Sorry, it's NZ$2 per minute to the original poster or US$1.20. My numbers are US$.
Can we expect an OMAAT review in the future? 😉 Take one for the team and fly economy (ok, premium economy) on an ultra-long-haul flight?
More seriously, though, I wonder if they'll offer buy-on-board options for any openings. Can you buy with points? And if you purchase through a partner, like United (points or cash), can you add it pre-flight (if you know it's on offer) by accessing your reservation via Air NZ's website?
Ben, it's priced in kiwi dollars... It's not USD 495.. more like USD 290 / EUR 250
I'm planning a trip to NZ for next year. I really, really, hope I can book a saver United J seat for 100K miles and don't have to do this triple bunk nonsense.
I'm planning a trip to NZ for next year. I really, really, hope I can book a saver United J seat for 100K miles and don't have to do this triple bunk nonsense.
One scenario worth considering is that when flying as a couple one party could book the first session with the other party booking the second. Each would then get four hours in the bunk with an additional four hours of a guaranteed empty seat next to them maybe not a big difference in PE but pretty nice to have in regular economy.
Kind of agree. I'd really like to try the skycouch concept. The thing that holds me back is that once you get a good business deal I'm not sure the pricing is actually competitive
it's not like they're holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy this product
Wonder if there's any protocol for the F/A's when encountering turbulent...
Will they be expected to climb the steps & rip open the curtains to inspect for compliance ? Or could they just 'require' pax to always be buckled in ?
Surprised the surcharge didn't incrementally escalate, the higher up the ladder ...
I wouldn't want to be bothered by 'nest mates' descending/asending the steps as they visit the lav, for instance....
Any discount if one brings his/hers own sheets/pillow/binkie ? ... lol
Who the f says “Wouldn’t never”
--------------------
Someone who would, obviously.
On a closer inspection of the photos, you'll see a belt attached over the blanket. So, visual inspection is easy.
Why is this nonsense? Are you suggesting they are offering a product nobody will want? Or is it just a product you don't want? I psy for J internationally, but don't belittle attempts to provide others with comfort.
ANZ economy is horribly cramped, esp legroom. I‘d rather they had reconfigured the cabin to return to their once class-leading 34” pitch, or more, than this gimmick.
Skynest is innovative, sure, but too close to my old boarding school dormitory - stinky socks, BO, farts, snoring - for my comfort.