Mak From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0 Posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1971 times:
I recently flight with Monarch from Manchester to Athens and the experience was awful. An old 20 years 757-200 and a very poor service make that flight an nightmare.
I believe the worst charter in Europe is Monarch.
(Did I mention the 4 hours delay due to engine problems of that poor 757!!!)
A330 From Belgium, joined May 1999, 649 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1855 times:
Hey, stop moaning, here are some facts for you:
* No monarch B757 is 20 years old, they are for the most part fairly new.
* Monarch has a very good name among leisure carriers, they are certainly NOT the worst of Europe.
* will you stop complaining about a delay due to maintenance?! Would you rather be in an emergency situation above the Aegean Sea????
Monarch has a splendid maintenance, they do not skip on this part.
* You paid for a charter, expect charter service then, if you wanted luxury, space and a good meal, then you simply had to buy a mainline ticket on BA,VS or OA!!( or you could go by car, see if that would bring you quicker in greece...)
TonyB From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2000, 111 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1847 times:
I've flown Monarch on a couple of occassions, LGW-Heraklion-LGW and also LGW-Seville-LGW (on what was a football charter for the Real Betis v Chelsea European Cup Winners Cup tie) and I must say I found the flights and service pretty good, especially on the Seville flight.Both times were on a 757 and although we had a delay on the Heraklion return flight I can't complain as, invariably with charters, it would appear from plenty of past charter experiences, these flights are often delayed.I would say that Monarch are far from being the worst charter airline, from my experience Transaer (formerly Translift) are far worse.I had the misfortune to travel Transaer on a LGW-Venice-LGW charter.The flight took off over 3 hours late, not due to any problems with the aircraft, but one of the flight crew failed to turn up and a replacement had to be flown down from Manchester.On the return flight the cabin crew miscounted the number of people on board claiming,wrongly,that there were more people on board than had originally flown out (bearing in mind everyone was allocated the same seat on both the outward and return journey) so we waited at the gate in Venice for over an hour before the cabin crew finally realised their error and informed the captain that it was now OK to depart.We finally departed Venice at 2am with a somewhat 'pissed off' bunch of passengers and received no apology for the complete cock-ups caused on both legs of the journey.
UK FLY From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1833 times:
Monarch arn't too bad.
I hate the hard seats which, compared to Britannia's or Airtours are rubbish.
the service is good but I wish they wouldn't waste there money on those stupid little menu's telling you what they have for dinner and give the ear phones out free instead.
I am only young but it wasn't that long ago that charter airlines had service.
all UK charter Airlines (excluding Britannia)
charge around £2:50 for the head phones. I think that Britannia have the best service off the UK Charters.
1.the ear phones are free.
2.paper on arrival and return.
3.the FA's arn't worried if you stay on the flight deck for more that 30 seconds.
4.Meals are decent.
5.the Captains can be bothered to tell you where they are flying over.
6.the have the "intertrac" which, tracks your position in the world.
7.the FA's dont start to get snotty if you, on the 767, go to get water from the fountains more than 3 times.
I think there are enough reasons to back up my opinion there.
All of this is what I have noticed.
some one else might think that Britannia are rubbish and that Airtours has the best service.
Long live Britannia & 360.