I can't say I agree with Air New Zealand ranking as number 1... The fact that you have to flip the seat down is a big negative in my opinion. I agree that both Air Canada and Delta have good products with direct aisle access (and the ability to recline the seat to a comfortable position rather than flipping it!). So I would rank them above Air New Zealand but for the Kiwi's the direct aisle access is a plus over the Qantas seat.

I also agree that Virgin's seat is the least comfortable (and I actually found it less comfortable that the original Qantas Skybed though the angle seat is a negative for that one).

I really don't get why people dislike flipping the seat over. You stand up to go to the loo or get a drink, and when you come back you spent two seconds flipping it over into a bed that actually goes flat and is more comfortable than the recline-to-flat versions. (Or, if the crew sees you, they insist on doing it for you.)

I miss the deeply reclined position with these seats, though -- the "armchair in the sky" that some seats offer is a big plus.

I'm not sure that you read the rankings right if you think that we're saying Virgin Australia is the least comfortable -- we picked Virgin as third from bottom and over the Qantas original Skybed, since the 777 business seat goes flat.

There are no complementary massages in the Auckland lounge of Air NZ, that facility was removed at the end of 2011, the massage room has removed, which is a great loss in my view.

The other negative about flying Air NZ from Australia is that the Trans Tasman product is variable.  A few flights have the 777-300ER and a few more have the 777-200ER and the 747, all of which provide virtually the same product effectively for the 3.5(or 7 from Perth) hour hop.   However, half the Sydney flights are in the 767, which offers (perfectly good) recliners, but the majority of Trans Tasman flights are with A320s with no business class product at all.  You might get booked into the enhanced economy "Works Deluxe" product which is a little like flying business class within Europe (middle seat blocked, business class lounge and luggage allowances, 34" seat pitch instead of 30", but economy class meal).  

NZ is very good in Business Premier, but it requires a keen eye to get the connections on the right aircraft.  Fine from Perth (all 777), not so good from Adelaide or Cairns (all A320), fine from Brisbane and Melbourne (almost always 777/747 connecting), Sydney is 50/50

Oh, damn -- the massage was such a bonus when I passed through Auckland after a stressful day late last year. Thanks, Libertyscott, I'll make that edit.

I'm not so sure that the trans-Tasman leg is such a huge drawback. While I seriously wish there were a business class product on the new A320s, I don't really have a huge quarrel with the excellent entertainment and 35" of legroom -- as long as you're not paying for biz.

(I went on about this at some length last year too, mind...)

The problem with a topic like this is that it's just so subjective! 

I don't particularly like sleeping surrounded by high walls, and find the padding on the Delta seat to be pretty poor (i certainly wouldn't rate the Delta seat ahead of Qantas'). I've never flown Air Canada, but agree that the old Air New Zealand seat makes a very comfortable bed (and I imagine the new one is even better though I haven't tried it yet).

My other issue with herringbone seats in the lack of storage. I like the Qantas seat because it has plenty of space around it with two proper armrests, particuarly at the window on the A380 (with the storage bins).

It should also be noted that the Qantas seat does actually have a decent gap between the end of the fully reclined bed and the seat in front of it, so there are really no problems getting out for an average sized adult (unlike the United/Virgin seats).

Oh, absolutely -- that's why we're up-front about what's a plus point in our book. I'm well aware that many people strongly dislike what they see as "coffin class", but on balance I'll take the downsides as a tradeoff for the upsides.

I don't find the herringbones as bad as all that for storage -- not least because you've got the space under and on the ottoman to put things during the day, plus usually some form of elbow-space, often under an armrest (in the Air NZ example, for instance). I'll agree with you, though: upstairs on an A380 or 747 with the extra side bins? A real winner.

And I'm not sure how thick your legs are, but if you can get through this gap then I'd love to know what crunches you do to keep them so toned! ;)

Haha, perhaps I was being a little bit optimistic when I said average sized adult. Certainly the Qantas seat is significantly easier to get out of than the United seat (which goes into the seat infront with a tiny gap at the end of the armrest) or the Virgin seat (which ends up under the overhang of the seat infront from memory).

Excellent Article John.  It is always good to see what the Pro's think of the pacific offerings.  I must admitt I mix my flying with pleasure and work trips.  As such I have never been enticed by the reports of the service and lack of 'panache' offered by Delta or Air Canada.

I agree wholeheartedly with the issue of direct aisle access; however, I swear I recall there being a gap between the Sky Bed II on QF and the seat in front.....admittedly I was exhausted and had a few glasses of bubbles onboard last time I was on an A380 (QF10).  Is anyone able to clarify this?  In that case the almost direct aisle access and the direct flights and lounges make QF a good contender for first place.  But maybe if you don't have a QF Plat. card and it is only the seat you are assessing there might be some contention.One last thoughtm flight timing and schedule?  Daily from BNE/MEL and 24 services a week from SYD, can that be beat? 

Thanks Dr T. I too mix flying for business and leisure, and I find I'm always more judgmental when it's my money (or miles) that's been spent!

There is a fairly small gap between the end of the 2nd-gen Skybed and the seat in front, but with the bulge of the seatback it's still a clamber.

In terms of schedule, you're quite right, Qantas is firmly ahead, but there's only three hours between (say) QF11 and QF107 out of Sydney, so it's not a huge difference. I know several passengers out of Brisbane and Melbourne who prefer to connect on Air NZ via Auckland and SFO rather than Sydney and LAX, for example.

(And I'll not disagree that Qantas' lounges are a reason to fly the Red Roo all on their own!)

Very interesting analysis. I was surpised to see Air New Zealand at #1, it's not like flying from Sydney or Melbourne to the USA via NZ instead of direct is really a choice many people would make though.

I can see that Air Canada makes more sense, I  have flown them once to get to Seattle and yes, makes more sense than flying into LAX!

If only Cathay Pacific had direct SYD-LAX or SYD-LAX flights with their new business class, now that would be the winenr outright!

Sure, Sydneysiders or Melburnians have other options. (More for the former, though -- it's Qantas or United for Melbourne.)

But if you're having to connect via MEL or SYD, you might as well connect in AKL instead -- especially since that means you can connect via SFO rather than LAX for your onward flight. And with the Air NZ seat firmly above the Virgin Australia seat in terms of comfort, I know several Velocity loyalists who choose to fly via AKL.

If the US-AU routes were thrown open to international competition I'd love to see Emirates, Singapore Airlines and Cathay Pacific stick their noses into that market. It'd be a very interesting stoush!