So far, it looks great. There is only info on domestic US flights, but the rest of the world will come shortly, but there are a couple of great features.
Searching is extremely quick, and there is a lot of choices, with details on prices.
But, the best thing (for us a.netters), you can input an origin airport, and then search for the cheapest flights at given ranges! Great for anyone that wants to just fly for as little as possible!
I haven't spent much time on it yet, but knowing google, it will just get better and better!
Can't wait for it to be implemented into the rest of the world.
rcair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 950 posts, RR: 25 Reply 1, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3179 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT
Very nice - I like the layout and how it shows you prices in a range. Simple and clean.
jeffbart33 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 37 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2995 times:
SolarFlyer22 From US Minor Outlying Islands, joined Nov 2009, 397 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2790 times:
Another great idear from Google. The range feature is great. I wish they could also calculate your carbon footprint based on plane type and typical load.
Semaex From Germany, joined Nov 2009, 773 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2502 times:
Quoting SolarFlyer22 (Reply 3): Another great idear from Google. The range feature is great. I wish they could also calculate your carbon footprint based on plane type and typical load.
That'd be quite something!
I really like the first impression of the feature. Randomly checked flights MIA-NYC (smart enough to search for all 3 airports!) around new year's eve, and the price shows up immediately, even with slower internet connection speed. Much better than all regular flight search engines.
If they start introducing European routes I might just get inclined using them on a regular basis....
// You know you're an aviation enthusiast when you look at your neighbour's cars and think about fleet commonality.
RamblinMan From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 1083 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2197 times:
So... it doesn't do a damn thing kayak doesn't do. And I just looked for a Chicago-NYC ticket and it did not display DL results at all. That's a Shuttle route.
rcair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 950 posts, RR: 25 Reply 6, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2194 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT
Quoting RamblinMan (Reply 6):
So... it doesn't do a damn thing kayak doesn't do.
And a Mac doesn't do a damn thing a PC does (or vise versa), and a Chevy doesn't do a damn thing a Ford doesn't...
And so on....
And in fact it does do a number of things Kayak doesn't.
If we lived in a world where we only needed one version of any tool - it'd be pretty boring.
CXfirst From Norway, joined Jan 2007, 2755 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2163 times:
This is a newly implemented service, and should almost be treated as a beta. Google have said that they only source some airlines so far, and only domestic. But, they aim to get results from every airline and search engines (such as expedia, etc.), to give customers every single price out there for every single route, but instantly.
I don't think it will be long until international routes are up.
Quoting rcair1 (Reply 7): It's all about the interface. I find most travel websites to be painful and overburdened. This was clean and quick. When the data is the same, it is about the presentation.
RamblinMan From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 1083 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2163 times:
Quoting rcair1 (Reply 7): And in fact it does do a number of things Kayak doesn't.
Name one. No matter how small a feature. Because no, it most certainly doesn't, unless you're talking about the map interface which would be great if it were even remotely accurate. Case-in-point...I just recreated a search for a ticket I just bought, an hour ago, ORD-LGA, for $120 on DL. This stupid thing won't return a result for less than $177 and won't even display DL flights. B6 was $150ish, btw, they're absent from this tool as well.
Quoting rcair1 (Reply 7): And a Mac doesn't do a damn thing a PC does (or vise versa)
Yes it does. It runs a completely different operating system. It's a completely different product.
looks and drives differently from a Ford, which looks and drives differently from a VW.
The examples you gave are of completely different products designed to look and feel distinctive from their competition. Google Flights does one thing, the same thing that its competitors do, and it does it less capably. Try again.
airport1970 From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 62 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2058 times:
Fail.
Two random cities...
I enter CHA for Chattanooga and it gives me Charlotte instead.
I enter DCA for destination
"Your search – Chattanooga to Washington – did not match any results."
So.. no way to fly from Chattanooga to Washington?
Kayak:
I enter CHA and it gives me Chattanooga
DCA destination
105 pages of results.
vhqpa From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 1385 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2043 times:
I hope ITA Classic doesn't disappear the interface mightn't be as nice but it's a lot more functional. I just had a quick play with Google flights and it appears all it does it get the fares from each airline in the one spot and provides links to the respective airlines booking page. Couldn't pull up any fare construction, fare rules or do circle or open jaw itineraries. I'd be very disappointment to say the least if I lost that functionality of ITA classic.
"There you go ladies and gentleman we're through Mach 1 the speed of sound no bumps no bangs... CONCORDE"
yeogeo From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 790 posts, RR: 14 Reply 11, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2005 times:
New York Times compares Kayak and Google Flight Search:
Birdwatching From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3587 posts, RR: 52 Reply 12, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1987 times:
Geez, what's up with most of you. Here's a new entrant to the market who just rolled out their service days ago. Of course it's not perfect yet. But look at the potential. Google has all the cool features and is fast, easy and fun to use. Kayak and the others have the full inventory of flights. What is better in regards of future potential? Clearly Google. All they need to do is feed their system with more sources and more data. Which is relatively easy and straightforward, once the whole framework is there.
I already love Google Flights, and I know that since it's Google within a few weeks it will cover EVERY flight in the whole world, including all the obscure and little known airlines from exotic places. Score one up for us enthusiasts.
Soren
All the things you probably hate about travelling are warm reminders that I'm home
rcair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 950 posts, RR: 25 Reply 13, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1970 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT
Quoting RamblinMan (Reply 8): The examples you gave are of completely different products designed to look and feel distinctive from their competition. Google Flights does one thing, the same thing that its competitors do, and it does it less capably. Try again.
Sorry RamblinMan - the difference is exactly in the same class as of change you mentioned, user interface and behavior.
I had to look up some flights today and, for the fun of it, compared Expedia, Goggle Flights, Kayak (which I never really liked) and Travelocity - plus UAL. I found slightly different options presented slightly different ways on all three. Not all showed exactly the same choices - or at least it was hard to find. There were some google flights did not have - per their statement that they are building out. It was way faster - but that may change with more usage.
Plus - I think competition is good. My only concern with google flights is that google is already too much of our life.... That concerns me a bit.
But, you go right ahead and use the one you like. That is just fine - in fact, it is good that you have choices.
Nuf said on my part - I'll probably not revisit. My passion is aircraft, not flight purchasing software.....
RamblinMan From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 1083 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1949 times:
Quoting rcair1 (Reply 13): Sorry RamblinMan - the difference is exactly in the same class as of change you mentioned, user interface and behavior.
To compare to your car example... GoogleFlights got 3 wheels and a busted transmission. Get it now?
Quoting airport1970 (Reply 9):
Fail.
"Your search – Chattanooga to Washington – did not match any results."
So.. no way to fly from Chattanooga to Washington?
Kayak:
105 pages of results.
See...I'm not alone. I pull up ORD-NYC and I don't get DL, B6, or NK. And the price I get is 35% higher than the price I JUST FRIGGIN' PAID. I pull up MDW-BNA and it says it can't be done? Really? I know WN rarely shows up in these things but I've flown that route on DL through ATL or DTW plenty of times.
Quoting Birdwatching (Reply 12): Of course it's not perfect yet. But look at the potential.
My problem here is not the idea, but the fact that this and just about every new google product these days is in a state of perpetual beta. But that doesn't stop every little thing Larry Page craps out from being touted as God's gift to mankind.
Sponsor Message: 
From Norway, joined Jan 2007, 2755 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 950 posts, 
From US Minor Outlying Islands, joined Nov 2009, 397 posts, 
From Germany, joined Nov 2009, 773 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 1385 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
