Lets face it...long distance economy sucks!

pclancy

Just back from another long trip across Asia and as I was sitting there I pondered just how poor the product you are purchasing actually is.

Example.

I flew Wellington-Sydney-Bangkok via Qantas on a 738 and A333. The 737 actually wasnt too bad interior and IFE wise but the A330 felt really old and tired. You get plonked into a tiny seat with minimal leg and arm room and told to sit there for 9 hours and watch your little TV. Now and then someone will appear with some food which helps pass the time and is usually OK quality. The air quality is terrible leaving you feeling sweaty, dehydrated and run down and your body will be aching from the physical discomfort. The seat layouts are designed to maximize revenue at the expense of passenger comfort. Business class prices are so insane that only the richest corporations can justify them. First class beyond most peoples reach.

In essence I paid several thousand dollars to feel like crap and be stuck in a tight position for several hours, arriving at my destination feeling like I need two days to recover from the experience. I'm not just bashing Qantas there, I've never flown any airline that I came off it feeling good after a long haul flight. The crew constantly make references to "Welcoming you on board" and "hope you enjoy your flight" but in reality you cant wait to get off and dread the whole experience. The crew do their best with what they have but really can't offer much due to the cramped, stuff conditions on board.

Why doesnt an airline just remove a few rows of seats, give everyone a few extra inches and seriously improve their on board offering? Its crazy, where else in life do you pay several grand for something that is actually a pretty poor product. We've seriously gone backwards in time when it comes to inflight comfort. I wish one airline would buck the trend, take a hit on revenue and actually make their passengers happy.

coylemj

pclancy wrote: »

Why doesnt an airline just remove a few rows of seats, give everyone a few extra inches and seriously improve their on board offering? Its crazy, where else in life do you pay several grand for something that is actually a pretty poor product. We've seriously gone backwards in time when it comes to inflight comfort. I wish one airline would buck the trend, take a hit on revenue and actually make their passengers happy.

Simple, it's because when most people are picking a carrier they do so on price alone and assume that the basic service offered by Singapore, BA, Qantas etc. is the same.

Did you research the legroom on Qantas vs. other carriers on the same route before you booked your flight?

Q.E.D.

BuffyBot

Why doesnt an airline just remove a few rows of seats, give everyone a few extra inches and seriously improve their on board offering?

AA tried that by adding extra legroom throughout economy and made a big hoo-haw about having More Room Throughout coach in the early 2000's. It bombed big time as folks simply weren't willing to pay the higher fares needed to make it profitable and it was removed circa 2005 IIRC. The other US airlines were killing them by offering cheaper fares. The simple fact is, the majority just don't care. This is why we see premium economy on the rise, dividing up those who are willing to pay a little bit more into a small sub cabin and the majority who don't/won't into the larger one.

pclancy

Of course, I travel a lot for business and pleasure. I don't choose on price, I go with Oneworld carriers usually as Qantas/BA/JAL/Malayasian serve Asia well from Australia/NZ. Using Seatguru.com you'll see there genreally is a few inches between them all (30-34) in seat pitch. I'm not getting at Qantas, I'm speaking about the entire industry in general. Why has the norm become "pack them in to maximise profit"

coylemj wrote: »

Simple, it's because when most people are picking a carrier they do so on price alone and assume that the basic service offered by Singapore, BA, Qantas etc. is the same.

Did you research the legroom on Qantas vs. other carriers on the same route before you booked your flight?

Q.E.D.

castie

The KLM/Emirates 777-300ER are pretty bad.

I never have a problem in economy with legroom though, its the seat widths.
With KLM I was almost in the aisle and when I got up at one point and looked back it was the same for multiple rows.

In saying that I do try to fly on the A380 as much as possible when I do long flights. (Syd - Sing, Sing - LHR)
Unfortunately work control the prices so sometimes this is not an option.

murphym7

Economy on long haul is a miserable experience. I can do UK to the east coast of the USA with relative ease - its when I need to go to the west coast it begins to become an endurance test. I have vowed never to fly to the west coast again in anything less than premium economy. Don't get me wrong, premium economy isn't the best thing since sliced bread, but it does make things a little bit more bearable.

As I travel mainly with my wife, two seats together on our own is important to us so I will try and book carriers running A340, A330. You can be lucky on the 747 by getting one of the sets of two at the back, if you are travelling as a couple, the two seats on your own can make a big difference to how bearable the flight will be.

pclancy

Yeah 2x4x2 are great to grab the double seats for couples or even just alone to reduce the chance of being stuck in the dreaded middle seat, Singapore's A380 I was on had the same config in economy upper deck.

But why has it become so bad that we put up with being packed in like sardines and suffer for so long...

martinsvi

think about where economy travel has gone in hundred years before you nag you don't spend 12 days on a drifting piece of wood with limited supply of food and surrounded by diseases only to get across the pond. Sure there's always room for improvement and I don't fancy sitting in a tiny room for hours my self, but the fact it self that we are one of the first generations that can afford to travel freely an reach any corner of the globe in 24 hours or less is amazing! If airlines would only think about comfort - I think that would still be a dream that will never come true for many of us...

full_irish

You've clearly never flown peasant class in the A380. London to Australia with Emirates and had more legroom than I needed, twas deligthful!

Note: this review may be biased due to the unlimited free booze being taken advantage of at the time

davepatr07

I travel quite a bit between NZ/Oz and Ireland and have found Emirates economy on the A380 better than the B773. In fact the EK A380 has been the best economy experience so far and a lot lot quieter than other aircraft flown.

The B773 is good for legroom but for width not great. I found the EK 773 certainly better than their A332. Etihad A332's and A340's are great with the 2-4-2 configuration. With Virgin Australia managed to get the 2nd last row window seat on their 777 when it goes to 2-4-2. Plenty of room to stretch out.

A tall fella such as meself will go for comfort if possible over price on long haul. It's not the seats that are starting to bother me but whether there are babies in the same row! One Etihad flight I took back last year from Abu Dhabi to Dublin they changed my seat last minute to 15A and was stuck next to not 1 baby but 4! Just lucky that wasn't the longer Melbourne flight!

I think airlines could have special children or baby class, even creche class. I know Malaysian have introduced non children flights. I have nothing against kids and understand families do have to travel but I think there should be room for improving the experience flying economy. Having said flying some airlines long haul economy does suck! Jetstar from Tokyo to Cairns was an experience not to be repeated!

pclancy

Yeah I really do sympathize with people that have to travel with babies. Will be doing it myself one day I'm sure Hopefully there's some kind of sedative for babies to keep them calm for the flight...

full_irish indeed but you'll find when travelling on business that showing up at your client site (especially if its a hospital as mine are) reeking of booze and hungover is not a good look

Lets get some funding and start an airline for tall people. Sure we won't be able to compete with the big boys on pricing but imagine promoting an airline that actually had decent legroom and great in flight atmosphere.

BuffyBot

Lets get some funding and start an airline for tall people. Sure we won't be able to compete with the big boys on pricing but imagine promoting an airline that actually had decent legroom and great in flight atmosphere.

You know what they say about the easiest way to become a millionaire is to be a billionaire and start an airline

martinsvi

pclancy wrote: »

Lets get some funding and start an airline for tall people. Sure we won't be able to compete with the big boys on pricing but imagine promoting an airline that actually had decent legroom and great in flight atmosphere.

I'll do the web page! We start out by advertising long haul flights for 100eur. Once people try to book a flight we add all sort of optional extras for legroom, seat width, no child flight etc.. etc.. And if someone just wants to get away with a cheap no-extra flight we display them a lousy error message that the seat is no longer available for that price... sounds familiar so it has to work!

christy c

I don't find it too bad for long haul, I'm tall and thin but never found legroom bad. I've flown Qantas and Singapore long haul and found them fine. In saying that I always feel envious walking past the business class seats, they make the economy seats look like they were designed for ants!

We can't really blame the airlines though, price is king for most people so airlines would be just shooting themselves in the foot if they were to take out seats and raise prices.

Looking forward to the launch of Boards Air

full_irish

Can i be Captain?

Although, only on the condition that I can still have the unlimited booze

MuffinsDa

For me, more important than the plane/seat type is load factor, which is down to luck really. A couple of years ago I flew to India on Lufthansa, brand new A330, on the way out it was delightful as the load factor was less than 50% and I had a whole row of seats to myself. On the way back it was horrible, the same type (A330), plane was completely full, stuffy, and terribly experience!

Also flew on MD11 on KLM and even though legroom is the same as other planes, I must say the overall experience was great! It "felt" spacious and posh and relatively quiet in the front. Don't know why!

Flying Virgin Atlantic to Tokyo (A346) in summer with two kids, absolutely dreading it already! I've heard Virgin has gone down hill alot recently...

seven_eleven

MuffinsDa wrote: »

For me, more important than the plane/seat type is load factor, which is down to luck really. A couple of years ago I flew to India on Lufthansa, brand new A330, on the way out it was delightful as the load factor was less than 50% and I had a whole row of seats to myself. On the way back it was horrible, the same type (A330), plane was completely full, stuffy, and terribly experience!

Also flew on MD11 on KLM and even though legroom is the same as other planes, I must say the overall experience was great! It "felt" spacious and posh and relatively quiet in the front. Don't know why!

Flying Virgin Atlantic to Tokyo (A346) in summer with two kids, absolutely dreading it already! I've heard Virgin has gone down hill alot recently...

KLM's older planes are great in regards to comfort on long haul imo!

ro_chez

WARNING: Video contains swearing :eek:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3dYS7PcAG4

martinsvi

ro_chez wrote: »

WARNING: Video contains swearing :eek:

YES!!! that's exactly what I was talking about!

EI-DOR

I flew with BA from LHR to Baltimore last summer and vice versa coming home on their B767-200. Only it was a 6 hour flight I didn't mind but any longer I would not fly on their 767s. No room in economy whats so ever.

Coming back to the UK I was stuck in the middle isle right in the centre. Every 2 mins I was hitting the chap on the left of me with my elbow. He was doing the same to me. Drove me insane and about an hour into the flight the heat was ridiculous. Sweat was running down my forehead. I had to complain to the cabin crew about the heat before I passed out. Few other passengers had to complain about the heat aswel. Never again will I be flying on that contraption of an aircraft.

smurfjed

We flew out of Melbourne in November on Air Asia X, they offered at the gate upgrades to Business Seats for A$150 each, for a 8 hour flight, i thought that this was a bargain, but we did laugh when they gave us our economy meals.

Our 777's used to have 8 abreast economy seating and were extremely comfortable, but as they competitors moved to 9 abreast we had to follow. I was walking around the 1st reconfigured aircraft before it left the hanger, the engineer was doing his best to convince me that each seat had exactly the same width as the extra width was taken from the aisles and walls!

First class beyond most peoples reach

Now you know why some of us love working for airlines

smurfjed

Irish Steve

seven_eleven wrote: »

KLM's older planes are great in regards to comfort on long haul imo!

I suspect that your experience is down to a factor that's not widely publicised.

Most long haul aircraft are pressurised to have cabin altitude of 8000 Ft when at height, but the DC10 (and MD11 AFAIK) are pressurised to have a cabin altitude of 4000 Ft when in the cruise, so the air density is better in the cabin. May not seem like much, and the downside is that it stresses the airframe a lot more, but in terms of passenger comfort, I found the DC10 a lot nicer on a long haul flight than any other type, regardless of it being Boeing or Airbus. There are still MD11's being used for long haul, not sure if any DC10's are still on long haul, I think they've all been snapped up for freighter conversions, and converted to freight MD10's, a hybrid which only needs a 2 man crew, as compared to the DC10's 3 man crew.

My gripe with long haul is the lack of space under some of the seats because of the IFE boxes, which make it very hard to get comfortable, and the lack of width. I'm not over tall, so height is not so much of an issue.

Re the gate upgrade to a better seat, that late in the process, there's no way to change the catering, that will have been booked long before the gate stage, but if that sort of offer is there, its worth taking, we were able to take a similar offer but some time in advance on Air Namibia from Gatwick to Windhoek, both night flights, leaving about 2100, and seriously long, so the extra comfort of the larger and better seats was very much worth having.

Best ever was a Freddie Laker (second time around) charter flight from Gatwick to Orlando, DC10. Flight over wasn't much fun, due to a checkin screwup on the bag count, and a tech fault on the aircraft as well, so we were best part of 5 hours late into Orlando, but on the way back, when we checked in, we got given seats 1A & 1C. Didn't think any more about it till we boarded, and on getting to the cabin, although it was in theory a single class charter flight, we discovered (to our delight) that the aircraft was 3 class, First, Business & Economy, and they'd put us in the First seats, and we also got the First treatment as well, which made for a very pleasant flight:D:D.

Yeah, apart from that, economy long haul can indeed be a pain, and short haul low cost can be even worse, Ireland unfortunately being in the forefront of the worst issues in that respect, and where the leaders go, the rest of the herd tend to follow. Not much we can do about that unfortunately, the race to the bottom has well and truly hit the aviation industry. While passengers vote for the worst by paying the lowest possible price, that's not going to change.

weisses

There are a few horror story's allright :eek:

The missus and me are planning to fly into SFO, and i really want to avoid feeling like sardines in a can

Any tips on flights and carriers/routes ??

Think that premium economy is a must these days

CelticRambler

pclancy wrote: »

Why doesnt an airline just remove a few rows of seats, give everyone a few extra inches and seriously improve their on board offering? Its crazy, where else in life do you pay several grand for something that is actually a pretty poor product. We've seriously gone backwards in time when it comes to inflight comfort. I wish one airline would buck the trend, take a hit on revenue and actually make their passengers happy.

Why? Because the industry is controlled by people whose experience is entirely based on running airlines badly. Up to now, the barriers to entry have been very high preventing any kind of serious commercial innovation. The situation has changed, and the paradigm is about to shift. Those of you with "what you need is ..." ideas, your time is coming! :cool:

Unfortunately, 'tis a like waiting for any big earthquake - not possible to predict exactly (but I know where the epicentre will be). :P

Stealthirl

I haven't had much experience travailing long haul in the last 10 years
But my last 2 were in March 07 to MCO on a BA B773 with 9 abreast seating if i remember right could have been 10 ? I ended up standing around the aft galley/toilet area for most of the 2 flights due to very poor leg room.

My other flight was with IE to JFK in July 05 on the A330 and was very pleasant indeed.

Im not very tall at an even 6ft but i am overweight at about 18st for the 07 flight but it was leg room not seat width that was my issue.

Im doing LGW-LAS in Sep and will be booking seats end of this month.
There's is 6 of us flying and 2 of us are geting PE seats up in the bubble of there refitted 744's
Economy seats are 1k each and PE is €1500,im hopeing the extra 250 each way is worth it.

I picked VS as i wated to fly on a 747, my last experience being in 89 to Australia and a handfull of flights on IE's old 741.

I think they should scrap all IFE reduce the fares but offer something like an ipad/tablet device that you could rent from them. This would also result in lighter AC as all the cabling,screens ect could be removed. They could then run a Wi-Fi network that could allow connection to IFE services ect.

If you have your owen tablet/laptop you could have the option to pay a fee to conect to this IFE network or just leave it.
In Sep i will bring my Ipad and wireless drive so i can watch/listen to what i wont rather then just makeing do with whats offered

Bessarion

Stealthirl wrote: »

I think they should scrap all IFE reduce the fares but offer something like an ipad/tablet device that you could rent from them. This would also result in lighter AC as all the cabling,screens ect could be removed. They could then run a Wi-Fi network that could allow connection to IFE services ect.

This is the future for the industry. Cathay have already stated that they expect to have no seat back screens 10 years from now.

The future of IFE is onboard streaming to the individual pax handheld device....ie the pax takes their own screen onboard with them. Look around on your next longhaul flight, at least 50% of pax will have some sort of device with a screen and wi-fi capability.

seven_eleven

Irish Steve wrote: »

I suspect that your experience is down to a factor that's not widely publicised.

Most long haul aircraft are pressurised to have cabin altitude of 8000 Ft when at height, but the DC10 (and MD11 AFAIK) are pressurised to have a cabin altitude of 4000 Ft when in the cruise, so the air density is better in the cabin. May not seem like much, and the downside is that it stresses the airframe a lot more, but in terms of passenger comfort, I found the DC10 a lot nicer on a long haul flight than any other type, regardless of it being Boeing or Airbus. There are still MD11's being used for long haul, not sure if any DC10's are still on long haul, I think they've all been snapped up for freighter conversions, and converted to freight MD10's, a hybrid which only needs a 2 man crew, as compared to the DC10's 3 man crew.

My gripe with long haul is the lack of space under some of the seats because of the IFE boxes, which make it very hard to get comfortable, and the lack of width. I'm not over tall, so height is not so much of an issue.

Re the gate upgrade to a better seat, that late in the process, there's no way to change the catering, that will have been booked long before the gate stage, but if that sort of offer is there, its worth taking, we were able to take a similar offer but some time in advance on Air Namibia from Gatwick to Windhoek, both night flights, leaving about 2100, and seriously long, so the extra comfort of the larger and better seats was very much worth having.

Best ever was a Freddie Laker (second time around) charter flight from Gatwick to Orlando, DC10. Flight over wasn't much fun, due to a checkin screwup on the bag count, and a tech fault on the aircraft as well, so we were best part of 5 hours late into Orlando, but on the way back, when we checked in, we got given seats 1A & 1C. Didn't think any more about it till we boarded, and on getting to the cabin, although it was in theory a single class charter flight, we discovered (to our delight) that the aircraft was 3 class, First, Business & Economy, and they'd put us in the First seats, and we also got the First treatment as well, which made for a very pleasant flight:D:D.

Yeah, apart from that, economy long haul can indeed be a pain, and short haul low cost can be even worse, Ireland unfortunately being in the forefront of the worst issues in that respect, and where the leaders go, the rest of the herd tend to follow. Not much we can do about that unfortunately, the race to the bottom has well and truly hit the aviation industry. While passengers vote for the worst by paying the lowest possible price, that's not going to change.

I was more talking in regard to their older 747's. I think the general dullness of the cabin, traditional cushioned seats (opposed to hard leather) and sitting in economy rows 21-27 and 50-54 make it a very enjoyable experience. 3 seats across and an aisle, then a wall. It was very comfortable.

brandon_flowers

Have to do Nice - Perth in April in economy. Our travel department has a rule that training and conference attendance trips are only allowed in economy. Unfortunately this is a training trip so I will either have the horrible Emirates 777 10 abreast treatment or 2 stops in CDG/FRA and SIN. I would prefer the 2 stops almost as I'll have lounge access.

In reply to weisses above, go non-stop to SFO from Europe if you can. LHR or LGW being closest options. Internal flights and airports in the US are a terrible experience to be honest especially in coach as they like to call it.

bk

Couldn't agree more on IFE. Tablets have become very cheap nowadays and most people who fly long distance have something of their own. Just make sure their is standard power at the seats and wifi where you can stream movies and TV shows from. You can also deliver the internet via wifi (relatively slow and sat based obviously).

What I disagree with is people whinging about long distance economy. The reality is long distance tickets have never been cheaper, meaning more people can fly and people can fly more often. This is good.

If you want extra comfort, then upgrade to premium economy, this was the reason this class was created.

McNulty737

For a couple of grand you travelled half way accross the world....try going back in time to when you would have had to cross the atlantic in a boat, or travel accross the country on horseback if you were privileged enough to own a horse.

Air travel is incredibly expensive and extremely difficult to make profitable, people need to have realistic expectations about service and be grateful that continental air travel is an affordable possibility.

brandon_flowers

McNulty737 wrote: »

For a couple of grand you travelled half way accross the world....try going back in time to when you would have had to cross the atlantic in a boat, or travel accross the country on horseback if you were privileged enough to own a horse.

Air travel is incredibly expensive and extremely difficult to make profitable, people need to have realistic expectations about service and be grateful that continental air travel is an affordable possibility.

You could say the same about hospitals, schools or any other service for that matter. We should be grateful that hospital procedures are better and cheaper now than they were 50 years ago. Are we more grateful? I doubt it, people flocking to eastern Europe and the like for dental treatment because it is even cheaper.

Air travel is a consumer driven industry, he who pays the piper calls the tune.

McNulty737

brandon_flowers wrote: »

You could say the same about hospitals, schools or any other service for that matter. We should be grateful that hospital procedures are better and cheaper now than they were 50 years ago. Are we more grateful? I doubt it, people flocking to eastern Europe and the like for dental treatment because it is even cheaper.

Air travel is a consumer driven industry, he who pays the piper calls the tune.

I agree that consumers 'call the tune', and they call the tune by having the choice of which airline to fly with. However what i'm saying is people need to have realistic expectations of what levels of service are possible when they are paying a very small amount to the airline to take them from one continent to the other (relative to the airlines cost of flying you).

People complain about leg room/seat size etc. Solution = less seats, bigger seats, more legroom. However to facilitate this the airline will need to charge more money per passenger to make up for the reduced pay load. As has been seen in the past, people are not willing to pay more and will opt for the cheaper option.

The notion that you have paid x amount of money and you don't get a perfectly comfortable service is kind of ridiculous, because you are paying to get from A to B, you are not paying for service or comfort (not paying much anyway)....so go ahead and choose the most comfortable economy class flight you can find, but just don't expect a back rub and a gourmet 3 class meal.

IRLConor

brandon_flowers wrote: »

Internal flights and airports in the US are a terrible experience to be honest especially in coach as they like to call it.

I think my main objection to internal US flights isn't the airports (which are rubbish) but the service. US carriers are terrible compared to other ones (in my experience at least).

I think the point that long distance travel is very cheap is well made though. I'm travelling to San Francisco at the end of the month and for €1500 I got:

DUB-ORD EI (Economy, exit row)
ORD-SFO UA (Premium Economy)
SFO-ORD UA (Premium Economy)
ORD-DUB EI (Premier)

It's not that long ago that €1500 would be the cost for the same journey in economy all the way. Granted the route isn't the best - Chicago O'Hare is a rubbish airport - but the alternatives via LHR/CDG/FRA were similar prices for economy all the way. There are certainly better quality options but they're at least 3 times the price at best.

faceman

IRLConor wrote: »

I think my main objection to internal US flights isn't the airports (which are rubbish) but the service. US carriers are terrible compared to other ones (in my experience at least).

I think the point that long distance travel is very cheap is well made though. I'm travelling to San Francisco at the end of the month and for €1500 I got:

DUB-ORD EI (Economy, exit row)
ORD-SFO UA (Premium Economy)
SFO-ORD UA (Premium Economy)
ORD-DUB EI (Premier)

It's not that long ago that €1500 would be the cost for the same journey in economy all the way. Granted the route isn't the best - Chicago O'Hare is a rubbish airport - but the alternatives via LHR/CDG/FRA were similar prices for economy all the way. There are certainly better quality options but they're at least 3 times the price at best.

I'm flying to SFO early march. Stuck in economy with BA. €650 though.

IRLConor

faceman wrote: »

I'm flying to SFO early march. Stuck in economy with BA. €650 though.

Yup, I'd be able to get economy all the way for about the same. BA economy is not bad though. Both they and Virgin are good options for economy to SFO.

One of the only reasons I'm flying Aer Lingus a bunch these days is because I have a couple of flights a year around Europe and having Gold Circle privileges makes Dublin airport on a busy morning much more bearable. Getting kerbside to airside in under 10 minutes even when the airport is busy is very nice.

pclancy

McNulty737 wrote: »

For a couple of grand you travelled half way accross the world....try going back in time to when you would have had to cross the Atlantic in a boat, or travel accross the country on horseback if you were privileged enough to own a horse.

Air travel is incredibly expensive and extremely difficult to make profitable, people need to have realistic expectations about service and be grateful that continental air travel is an affordable possibility.

Lol, OK so we're not allowed discuss the quality of a product any more since we should be grateful that technology and progress have advanced the human race so much? :rolleyes: I must call my software developers to tell them to stop refining their products since our customers should be grateful to not be writing on stone slabs.

I'm also not one to complain, I appreciate what I get for my money but what my point in this thread is, why have we become so used to such a bad quality product in general.

I disagree that its incredibly hard to make it profitable while also offering a good quality service. An extra inch or two of legroom, decent atmospheric conditions or reduced cabin atmosphere and some good friendly service wouldnt have to break the bank and the first few carriers to do it would win plenty of new customers that were willing to pay a bit extra. Or even something like an entire plane of premium economy type seats.

9/11 and the GFC may have killed a lot of the profits and good times of aviation but its disappointing the focus in economy is "pack em in nice and tight to maximise the $$$" without much care for people's comforts.

smurfjed

IRLConor, give Jetblue or Virgin America a try and see if they change your opinion. I love Jetblue, everything from their attitude to the live TV during flight makes for an extremely enjoyable journey.

smurfjed

hibby

Premium Economy was an important innovation.

I fly between Japan and Ireland fairly regularly, and tend to go for KLM and Air France because they are cheaper.

It varies from year to year but I can typically get an economy return ticket DUB-KIX for around 800.

One time we were upgraded to business by KLM. It was great, we loved the whole experience and the extra comfort. For a long time, I tried - and failed - to find a way to rationalise the extra cost. A business class return would cost 2500 to 3000 each. For two people, that's an extra 3400.

No level of comfort is worth that. For a saving of 3400, I would be willing to spend the flight face down on the ground with a bag on my head, no food, Bieber on the headphones, and a kick from the cabin attendant every hour on the hour.

Back on the ground (in the real world) that 3400 will buy an awful lot of comfort - 2 weeks in a very nice hotel for example.

Then Air France premium economy came along. 1500 each, 2 comfier and roomier seats side by side, slightly better treatment, bigger luggage allowance, and you can sit in the AF lounge in Paris on the return trip to Dublin. All for cheaper than an economy class ticket with Lufthansa.

McNulty737

pclancy wrote: »

I disagree that its incredibly hard to make it profitable while also offering a good quality service. An extra inch or two of legroom, decent atmospheric conditions or reduced cabin atmosphere and some good friendly service wouldnt have to break the bank and the first few carriers to do it would win plenty of new customers that were willing to pay a bit extra. Or even something like an entire plane of premium economy type seats.

Decent atmospheric conditions? What? You want them to fly you at 20,000 feet to reduce the cabin altitude or something? More leg room? Again, less seats = less payload = your ticket becomes alot more expensive.

Put it this way, how much extra are you willing to pay for what you would consider an acceptable level of service?

murphym7

IRLConor wrote: »

I think my main objection to internal US flights isn't the airports (which are rubbish) but the service. US carriers are terrible compared to other ones (in my experience at least).

I think the point that long distance travel is very cheap is well made though. I'm travelling to San Francisco at the end of the month and for €1500 I got:

DUB-ORD EI (Economy, exit row)
ORD-SFO UA (Premium Economy)
SFO-ORD UA (Premium Economy)
ORD-DUB EI (Premier)

It's not that long ago that €1500 would be the cost for the same journey in economy all the way. Granted the route isn't the best - Chicago O'Hare is a rubbish airport - but the alternatives via LHR/CDG/FRA were similar prices for economy all the way. There are certainly better quality options but they're at least 3 times the price at best.

Thats a super deal, despite the ORD bit.

IRLConor

smurfjed wrote: »

IRLConor, give Jetblue or Virgin America a try and see if they change your opinion. I love Jetblue, everything from their attitude to the live TV during flight makes for an extremely enjoyable journey.

I must give them a try. So far I've avoided JetBlue only because the only options I could find using them connected via BOS/JFK and I prefer the 8hr/5hr split via ORD to the ~7hr/~7hr split via the east coast. (In truth, I prefer the 1hr/11hr split via LHR but as above I've been using the work trips to get Gold Circle points to make my personal trips more comfortable.)

I haven't seen any options with Virgin America, but I've heard great things about them from some of my US colleagues.

murphym7 wrote: »

Thats a super deal, despite the ORD bit.

Yup, EI have some stonking prices to the west coast sometimes. I had a DUB-ORD-PDX round-trip a couple of weeks ago for €710.42 (€630.42 excluding the charges for selecting exit rows). An extra ~$50 out of my own pocket got me Economy Plus seating on one of the United legs too.

brandon_flowers

I was reading in the LH magazine today that they are introducing Premium Economy on their inter-continental routes shortly. It didn't give a time-frame or routes but hopefully it will be a match or improvement on Air France. Since most of the travel I do is with these two airlines we were still able to use business class with LH for flights greater than 6 hours, now it will be PremEco all the way.

In response to McNulty I would be willing to pay for a premium economy seat no problem, but not a business seat. The chasm in service and price between the two is not justifiable when paying from your own pocket. And at present Prem Eco is not widely available therefore you are stuck with economy, hence the complaints.

McNulty737

How much extra you willing to pay? 25%? 45%?

It will be interesting to see if it works, brave for an airline to come in with higher prices than the competition.

brandon_flowers

I would pay 50% on top so instead of €500 for bargain basement economy I would pay €750 for prem-eco. The business for such a flight I am gauging is above €2000 so that is out of the question.

Did a quick check. AF CDG-LAX lowest Economy fare is €1094 for certain dates in March and direct flights. Premium Economy is €1,684 for the same flights, Business is €3,875 and First is €10,690.

For the extra €300 each way I would certainly take Prem Eco for an 11-12h flight.

EDIT: This will give you an idea of the better service you get from AF. I assume LH will follow a similar line with separate cabin and more business class like meals.

http://www.airfrance.fr/FR/en/common/guideeconomy/classeetconfort/premium_economy_restauration.htm

McNulty737

Ok well fair enough, for 50% extra you can certainly expect a better service. But I'd be curious to see the general demand for this ie. how many people are willing/can afford to pay the extra (600 quid in the AF example you gave).

Del2005

brandon_flowers wrote: »

You could say the same about hospitals, schools or any other service for that matter. We should be grateful that hospital procedures are better and cheaper now than they were 50 years ago. Are we more grateful? I doubt it, people flocking to eastern Europe and the like for dental treatment because it is even cheaper.

Air travel is a consumer driven industry, he who pays the piper calls the tune.

Hospital treatments are going up and up and up, with no sign of them ever coming down. That's partially the reason why private health insurance is sky-rocketing in Ireland and the main reason in the rest of the world.

MuffinsDa

hibby wrote: »

I fly between Japan and Ireland fairly regularly, and tend to go for KLM and Air France because they are cheaper.

On a side note, have you flown Virgin on LHR-NRT route in economy recently? Wondering if they are as bad as they're made out to be these days, read really negative feedbacks

murphym7

brandon_flowers wrote: »

I would pay 50% on top so instead of €500 for bargain basement economy I would pay €750 for prem-eco. The business for such a flight I am gauging is above €2000 so that is out of the question.

Did a quick check. AF CDG-LAX lowest Economy fare is €1094 for certain dates in March and direct flights. Premium Economy is €1,684 for the same flights, Business is €3,875 and First is €10,690.

For the extra €300 each way I would certainly take Prem Eco for an 11-12h flight.

EDIT: This will give you an idea of the better service you get from AF. I assume LH will follow a similar line with separate cabin and more business class like meals.

http://www.airfrance.fr/FR/en/common/guideeconomy/classeetconfort/premium_economy_restauration.htm

That new Air France product looks great. I have flown PE with Virgin and BA - this looks better.

Stinicker

I have flown long haul alot in the last 3 years and it can vary alot by airline and aircraft type.

I must give honorable mention first of all to Qantas after my many flights with them on my RTW ticket in 2010, their service I found excellent and I flew from Sydney to Los Angeles on the A380 in economy and it was an excellent flight despite its 16hr length. I had enough room, great IFE and a great roomy feeling. I flew Qantas to Singapore on the way over to Australia also on a Boeing 747 and it was another great flight, this was in 2010 and I took a Qantas A330 from Singapore to Perth. Matter of fact I had no problems on any Qantas flight and can only ever recommend them, some people slate them badly but I found them great.

I flew British Airways back from LAX to London in 2010 and I was totally cramped and despite it being the Boeing 747 it really sucked and I had the IFE box under the seat infront of me to add to the misery. The IFE was terrible with a tiny screen and the sort of snowy picture you'd get on analog tv in the old days.

In 2011 I flew Etihad from Heathrow to Bangkok on the A340-600 and Boeing 777-300ER with 9 a-breast seating. Both flights were fine and Abu Dhabi airport a good place for transiting.

In 2012 I flew with Emirates from Dublin on the A330 and onwards to Kuala Lumpur on the Boeing 777-300ER (10 abreast), the A330 service was just borderline okay, the IFE is streamed and not on demand, and it was just about bearable for the 8hrs to Dubai. Then I got onto the Boeing 777-300ER and it was an absolute hellish 8hrs over to Kuala Lumpur with practically no legroom and the IFE box again to boot. It was the worst long haul flight I ever took in my life and Dubai airport is a chaotic undercapacity hell hole, queues for everything and a total nightmare compared with Abu Dhabi. I flew the the Emirates A380 back from Bangkok a few weeks later and it was an excellent flight but I then had to endure Dubai airport again and the A330 back to Ireland, Emirates were a major let down for me last year, never again!

This year I am booked with Etihad back to Bangkok from Dublin and homewards from Manilla all on the Boeing 777-300ER, I had a good experience in 2011 but I have read that they have since converted all their 777's from 9-a-breast to 10-a-breast, so if true this will be a seriously sucky flight.

For me the A380 is the way to go, but as no carrier serves Ireland with the A380 it is hardly worth going to London to catch it all the ways to Asia and I'd rather do two stops than 3 to SE Asia. If I was going back to Australia or to New Zealand I would fly with Qantas on the A380 or Singapore Airlines especially for NZ or the East Coast of Oz. Qantas's move to Dubai is a total disaster for flying to Australia as nearly all Australian cities are so well served from Singapore by Qantas, wheras Qantas will only fly to Dubai from Sydney and Melbourne. Emirates airline are terrible on the 777 service and Dubai airport is chaotic and I am sure Singapore airlines will do well after Qantas's tie up with Emirates.

The new Boeing 787 has a very low altitude cabin pressure and is supposed to be nice, they are all grounded now over the Battery issues and with the small passenger capacity it could be a nice aircraft for the thinner long haul routes, Norwegian are planning to use them on the Oslo-Bangkok route and if Boeing get them right they could be a winner. I am doubtful though and actually fear for Boeing as Boeing really damaged themselves when the merged with McDonnell-Douglas. I would never fly on an MD aircraft especially a DC aircraft as they have had far too many accidents. Airbus is by far the safest.

smurfjed

The new Boeing 787 has a very low altitude cabin pressure

I read that it will be a 6000 ft cabin altitude, I don't believe that it will be of any great benefit.

smurfjed

bnt

A few years ago, I had a chance to compare Economy and Premium Economy on the same route - possibly the exact same plane (both were BA 773). From LHR on the way to Houston (IAH), I had volunteered my pre-booked window seat so that a family could stay together, and ended up in a middle seat. That got me a glass of champagne from the flight attendant, and (I suspect) a free upgrade on the way back.

I liked the extra legroom, but that's not generally my biggest problem with Economy. I'm a hair under 6' tall, but seem to fit in there OK. It's the seats themselves that get me. They don't have sufficient padding, or the padding compresses to the point where it's useless, and I get a structural rib digging in to my coccyx. The PE seat actually seemed slightly worse, though it was probably the same. Ryanair seats are kinder on my bum - must be the pleather.

PS: the length of a flight is a problem. My longest was around 13 hours, and by the end I was going stir crazy. I'd have real problems on one of those 18-hour flights e.g. SAA from Johannesburg to Washington DC.

PPS: another thing people forget about long haul flights is that the thinner air causes you to lose water, through your skin, and you can end up dehydrated. Drink plenty of water if you can.