Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Top 10 Economy Classes Of 2013  
User currently offlinenicholasjet From United Kingdom, joined May 2013, 62 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 12054 times:

I am sure this is going to cause a huge amount of controversy, but what do you think about the news that the top 10 economy classes of 2013 have been announced?

http://thedesignair.net/2013/06/04/t...ir-top-10-economy-classes-of-2013/

10. Porter
09. Hawaiian Airlines
08. Starflyer
07. Virgin Atlantic
06. Qatar
05. Etihad
04. Singapore Airlines
03. Oman Air
02. Virgin America
01. Air New Zealand

I agree Air New Zealand should win, and that Singapore, Oman air and Etihad should be in. I guess it's like picking a needle in a haystack, but no Thai or Malaysian?

Which ones are missing/valid in your opinion?

64 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinenicholasjet From United Kingdom, joined May 2013, 62 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 12054 times:

Yey, it's working again!

User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10901 posts, RR: 37
Reply 2, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 11995 times:

Quoting nicholasjet (Thread starter):
Which ones are missing/valid in your opinion?

Swiss.

They should be in the top 5 economy classes.

I'd scrub Virgin America and put Swiss as the number two.


        



There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offlineHECA From Netherlands, joined Apr 2007, 232 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 11758 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 2):
Swiss.

They should be in the top 5 economy classes.

I'd scrub Virgin America and put Swiss as the number two.

Fully agree!


User currently offlineukoverlander From United Kingdom, joined May 2010, 369 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 11653 times:

What - no, United, Delta or AA........shocking!!!!   

User currently offlineoc2dc From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 11514 times:

I'm trying to understand why Virgin America is #2. They don't even fly internationally (with the exception of Mexico) and they don't have wide-bodies. Same goes for Porter. They are a regional airline. They shouldn't be considered.


Yes, Virgin America has a relatively nice product, but do they take service into consideration? If so, perhaps Virgin Atlantic would take its place as #2.



I'm not complaining, I'm critiquing...
User currently offlinealfa164 From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 487 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 11492 times:

I am sure Hawaiian got in based on their short-haul, inter-island flights; their long haul (I've been on MNL-HNL) is definitely nothing to write home about.

On the other hand, Ethiad was outstanding; if you've never flown them, rest assured they deserve to be on this list. Based on reports - I haven't flown Virgin America - the offer a very pleasant coach experience, and they probably earn kudos from passengers who are disappointed (a mild term) in other domestic carriers.

Thai and Malaysian? Thai isn't what it once was, unfortunately... and Malaysian never was. I'd have to put Korean and EVA as top contenders; the Asian airline industry is almost u universally top tier, but TG and MH aren't the best of them.


User currently offlineely747 From Slovakia, joined Jan 2013, 140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 11474 times:

I would expect FR to make it to the very top            
Maybe next year ...

[Edited 2013-06-05 15:18:19]

User currently offlineb787900 From Canada, joined Sep 2011, 25 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 11448 times:

Interesting. I personally find AC, WS and DL to be much better than porter, hard product wise.

Quoting HECA (Reply 3):

Fully disagree. What's wrong with Virgin America? Their domestic flights are pretty comfortable, enjoyable and have above average customer care. In addition to that, most seats on VX have personal video screens (IFE). It is better than what Swiss offers on their intra-European flights. As far as I know, their A32X series aircraft do not have personal video screens at each seat. However, their long haul is pretty good. VIrgin America doesn't fly long haul.

Quoting ukoverlander (Reply 4):

I see no BA, LH, AF, KL their either. So much for the wonderful Euro airlines...


User currently offlinemikeology From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 124 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 11447 times:

I'd have thought JetBlue (B6) would have made top 10 as well

User currently offlinestlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9390 posts, RR: 26
Reply 10, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 11330 times:

Go Porter. I highly enjoyed them.


if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
User currently offlineBD338 From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 711 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 11302 times:

Quoting b787900 (Reply 8):
I see no BA, LH, AF, KL their either. So much for the wonderful Euro airlines...

I'm not surprised, the Euro airlines in my experience have been going backwards for a few years now in Y. Almost down to the DL, US, AA, UA level.

For TPAC I don't even look at US airlines anymore, I'll happily pay to fly SQ etc....looking forward to trying NZ this year. Looks like I might have made a good choice there as well  


User currently offlinemotorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 11054 times:

Given the following criteria...

Quote:
airlines around the world innovate and renovate their economy products to offer a point of difference and make them better than their competitors

and in particular...

Quote:
rated for giving the passenger the best possible experience, both from service and hard product in the air in an economy class

from...

TheDesignAir Top 10 Economy Classes Of 2013

It's gratifying, from the perspective of those in this part of the world, that NZ has come out on top. A little surprising, but nevertheless gratifying.

The surprise comes from my recent experience with NZ in short and medium haul Y class; domestically, across the Tasman and to the south Pacific. The seats-to-suit product has rendered Y inconsistent, parts of it like a full service carrier, others like an LCC.

And, anecdotally, in long-haul, 10-abreast in Y - on the 77W - is a squeeze for a growing (in height and weight) population. I guess the cuddle-suite may have helped in this regard given the criteria on innovation. I have only flown in Y+ on the 77W and this is worthy of positive recognition but not in this set of ratings.

I do believe that the service from NZ staff - on the ground and in the air - is fantastic though, ne plus ultra, congratulations!



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8412 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 10738 times:

Quoting BD338 (Reply 11):
I'm not surprised, the Euro airlines in my experience have been going backwards for a few years now in Y. Almost down to the DL, US, AA, UA level.

You can thank the JVs for that. The product has to be the consistent across all partners and usually the worst wins out. Having said that, I still find the service of the Euro carriers to be generaly better than the US legacy carriers. I especially like the service of LX and TP. Very friendly, helpfull, and professional.


User currently offlinevegas005 From Switzerland, joined Mar 2005, 320 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 10559 times:

Quoting HECA (Reply 3):
Quoting nicholasjet (Thread starter):
Which ones are missing/valid in your opinion?

Swiss.

They should be in the top 5 economy classes.

I'd scrub Virgin America and put Swiss as the number two.

Curious as to what you think makes Swiss a candidate.


User currently offlinesierra3tango From Bahrain, joined Mar 2013, 339 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 10271 times:

Examining the judges details & the manner in which date is written (mm/dd/yyyy) this looks like a North American survey and as such is probably ? quite fair from that perspective, though quite how Oman Air got on the list is a bit of a mystery

It mixes SH & LH or maybe a better description NB / WB; quite how you compare SQ & Porter in any rational sense is challenging (to say the least), aircraft type, ave sector times, size of operations etc etc.

Looking from outside Nth America (been to 58 countries but never been to Nth America) it is interesting but not terribly relevant with 4 airlines operating mostly inter regional, leaving 6 which are pretty obvious candidates.

If you exclude NB only / regional operators I would delete Virgin Atlantic (my opinion) and add

LH/ BA/ Korean / Malaysian / QF


User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17544 posts, RR: 46
Reply 16, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 10252 times:

And yet FR, NK, G4, and CM are making more money than any of them  . Even US and DL are more profitable...


E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineJohnClipper From Hong Kong, joined Aug 2005, 845 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 10042 times:

No CX?

filler

filler


User currently offlinecipango From Ireland, joined Jul 2009, 614 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 9829 times:

I understand how they have been selected, of course I might nominate one or two more but I feel VS should not be there. It isn't the most pleasant economy class I have been in TBH and especially doesn't deserve a place on this list.

User currently offlinen729pa From UK - England, joined Jan 2011, 415 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9671 times:

Quoting nicholasjet (Thread starter):
I'm not surprised, the Euro airlines in my experience have been going backwards for a few years now in Y. Almost down to the DL, US, AA, UA level

I would tend to agree, but I find Swiss and Lufthansa at the top end, BA are bearable, AF better than expected, AZ alright SN, SK poor. But even on a 2 hour+ flight you're lucky if you get more than a coffee and a bun/sandwich.

I fly QF a lot and find their Y service is generally pretty good, long haul and domestic. Even on an hour long flight you get more in way of food and drink than you do on a 2 hour BA flight across Europe for example. I would say you get twice as much in fact, orange juice, water and coffee, plus cheese + biscuits, a cake of some sort, fresh or dried fruit, perhaps a small choc bar or oat/seeded snack on QF. BA you'll get a coffee and a small (about the size of a computer mouse) roll.
Having just got back from Australia recently, I would say their domestic Y service has improved (more hot meals, inflight entertainment etc), but return flight was a bit weak, but I won't judge them on one flight when the other 28 have been of a high standard.

No EK?? I though they were supposed to be the standard everyone aspires too!

I'm curious to know what anyone thinks of JL/NH .......(planning a trip to Japan next year all being well)


just adding...there's a similar post about the Top 20 worst airlines, there's a link then to the Top 20 best and needless to say very different results, so just goes to show how subjective this all is.

[Edited 2013-06-06 00:56:16]

User currently offlineDexSwart From Australia, joined Aug 2012, 567 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9559 times:

NZ has an excellent product.
Although, I'm surprised nobody brought up VA yet, they've got a very competitive product, with my far the most legroom I've ever seen for a standard Economy seat.

QF, as stated above by n729pa also has quite a nice product.

To make it slightly fairer, I say the list should've been split between long and short haul. Porter didn't stand a chance against some of those Middle Eastern giants or Asian mighties as well.



Durban. Melbourne. Denver. Hong Kong.
User currently offlinequiet1 From Thailand, joined Apr 2010, 357 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 9334 times:

Doesn't NZ have 10-abreast on the 777-300ERs? If so, that's impressive that they made the top ten, much less number 1!

User currently offlineafterburner33 From New Zealand, joined Aug 2012, 70 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 9294 times:

Quoting quiet1 (Reply 21):

Doesn't NZ have 10-abreast on the 777-300ERs? If so, that's impressive that they made the top ten, much less number 1!

Yes, and they're going 10-abreast on the 777-200ERs as well...


User currently offlineLondonCity From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2008, 1496 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 8894 times:

Quoting quiet1 (Reply 21):
Doesn't NZ have 10-abreast on the 777-300ERs? If so, that's impressive that they made the top ten, much less number 1!



Etihad at #5 also has 10-abreast on its B777-300ERs.


User currently offlinechrisrad From Australia, joined Dec 2000, 1069 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 8833 times:

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 6):
Thai and Malaysian? Thai isn't what it once was, unfortunately... and Malaysian never was. I'd have to put Korean and EVA as top contenders; the Asian airline industry is almost u universally top tier, but TG and MH aren't the best of them.

I along with many others would beg to differ. TG and MH were recently about the only airlines to offer 34inch pitch in Y class. MH has won best economy class on a few occasions alone.



Welcome aboard Malaysia Airlines! Winner of Best Cabin Staff 2001,2002,2003,2004,2007,2009,2012
User currently offlineNobleRT From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 35 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 9137 times:

I have always been extremely comfortable in CX seats. I'm 6'1 and I always feel I have more than enough room and comfort. I would have loved to see CX on this list.

User currently offlinetimpdx From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 566 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8997 times:

I am a fan of MH, they should be on there on seat pitch alone. Etihad is pretty good, I found VA extremely cramped, but flew them last in 2002, maybe they have improved. Thai was nothing to write home about, I am fond of OZ, they should be a contender. Just flew NZ and its my second great experience with them (the 767 product LAX-RAR is great, hard to top 2-3-2 and great service, too)

I also put B6 ahead of VX based on seat pitch in Y.


User currently offlineaerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 2716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 27, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 9079 times:

Quoting LondonCity (Reply 23):
Etihad at #5 also has 10-abreast on its B777-300ERs.

Yeah, and I was surprised to find it so very average.

Sorry but without doubt SQ's soft and hard (ahem) product still comes out on top.


User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3775 posts, RR: 11
Reply 28, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8982 times:

Quoting JohnClipper (Reply 17):
No CX?

The new seats might have made the list, but the previous generation hard shell no-recline torture devices they came up with are still flying around in the 747s and A340s. Those pathetic and painful excuses for economy seats are enough to close that list's door for CX...



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2013 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8751 times:

Quoting afterburner33 (Reply 22):
Quoting quiet1 (Reply 21):

Doesn't NZ have 10-abreast on the 777-300ERs? If so, that's impressive that they made the top ten, much less number 1!

Yes, and they're going 10-abreast on the 777-200ERs as well...

Give me an SQ A380 over a 10Y NZ 777 any day!



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlineklwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 2047 posts, RR: 3
Reply 30, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8606 times:

I took EY long haul several times. Nice inflight entertainment and the catering is a little better than average. Good flight attendants.

But honestly, it's still economy. Seats are always uncomfortable.

Saudi is not bad in economy either actually.


User currently offlineukoverlander From United Kingdom, joined May 2010, 369 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8524 times:

Quoting oc2dc (Reply 5):
They don't even fly internationally (with the exception of Mexico)

I think you just answered your own question. Last time I checked Mexico was an international flight from the USA.


User currently offlinesierra3tango From Bahrain, joined Mar 2013, 339 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8429 times:

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 30):
Saudi is not bad in economy either actually.

Very true the food's A1 good, but it ain't going to gain any traction here for obvious reasons


User currently offlinemixalakhs From Cyprus, joined Jan 2006, 39 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8218 times:

Virgin Atlantic top 10 and not Air France.
It is a joke.


User currently offlinealfa164 From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 487 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 8123 times:

Quoting n729pa (Reply 19):
No EK?? I though they were supposed to be the standard everyone aspires too!

EK gained its reputation for an excellent product up front, but its economy cabin is mediocre... at best.


User currently offlinenicholasjet From United Kingdom, joined May 2013, 62 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 7598 times:

But aren't most economy cabins mediocre. If they were all amazing why would people pay extra for premium economy or business or even first. It's a difficult one to rate I think because in one way the airlines can vary so much, but on the other hand we get upset over a couple of inches *ahem*

User currently offlineJBLUA320 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3179 posts, RR: 19
Reply 36, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 7572 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It says Virgin America's seat width is 19.7"... I've been on VX countless times and it's a nice product, but there is no way that seat is almost 20" wide. Or am I just crazy?? Can someone confirm? I know SeatGuru also says 19.7" but that just seems... huge!

[Edited 2013-06-06 23:48:07]

User currently offlinereality From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 491 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 7589 times:

Quoting b787900 (Reply 8):
VIrgin America doesn't fly long haul.

SFO > JFK isn't long haul? Say what?


User currently offline330lover From Belgium, joined Jul 2008, 589 posts, RR: 0
Reply 38, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 7531 times:

Quoting nicholasjet (Reply 35):
It's a difficult one to rate I think because in one way the airlines can vary so much

For me, one should make a separate list for long haul and short haul!
There is no good comparison possible between a 1 hr Porter flight and a 12 hr ANZ.

An eco seat for short haul can be comfortable for a 1-2 hr flight, but the very same seat on a 12 hrs flight can be a real nightmare.
Service level is another thing. On a short flight, crew often has to rush through service to get everything finished on time. On a long flight, they are more at ease and can take the time needed to offer top service (not that all airlines aim at this though...).

The difference is even bigger for business or first class.
Domestic flights (like in US or China) often have first but no business. You certainly can't compare this first with a long haul first like AA, LX, CX,...

So, in my opinion, these lists only make sense when split up.



Britten Norman Islander VP-FBR on Falkland Islands. THAT'S FLYING!
User currently offline330lover From Belgium, joined Jul 2008, 589 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 7527 times:

Quoting reality (Reply 37):
SFO > JFK isn't long haul?

At around 5:30hrs, it's not long haul. More like medium.
Or is there a set definition how long a flight has to take to become short, medium or long haul?

On a side note: I can see that 05:30hrs for some people is short haul, for others very long haul  



Britten Norman Islander VP-FBR on Falkland Islands. THAT'S FLYING!
User currently offlinenicholasjet From United Kingdom, joined May 2013, 62 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7029 times:

I wonder how this equates to boeing vs airbus in terms of passenger comfort?

User currently offlinemotorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 41, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 6662 times:

Quoting nicholasjet (Reply 40):

Don't mention the war!

BTW, totally agree with a330lover, there is no way one can objectively compare long-haul with short-haul products (in any class).

And to those of you who say SQ has the best Y-class product overall, they appear to have lost top placing in this set of ratings because of their lack of price flexibility. It sounds to me that SQ don't have to lift their skirts (or sarong-kebayas) to attract customers, theirs is not a battle fought on price.



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineaerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 2716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 42, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 6651 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 29):
Give me an SQ A380 over a 10Y NZ 777 any day!

Why don't you just compare apples, rather than insert the AvB angle? An SQ77W at 9 abreast against an NZ 77W at 10 abreast... SQ wins hands down every time.


User currently offlineBLRAviation From India, joined Feb 2009, 351 posts, RR: 14
Reply 43, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 6587 times:

Quoting JohnClipper (Reply 17):
No CX?

Have to second your statement. With the new economy, one would agree that CX should be up there. But the old product? Its quite uncomfortable.



I am on Twitter @BLRAviation
User currently offlinezkncj From New Zealand, joined Nov 2005, 546 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 6325 times:

Quoting nicholasjet (Thread starter):
I agree Air New Zealand should win,

This is why not http://www.airliners.net/photo/Air-N...d=a6f947e714a3f39ae77f279cce8e6d87


User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15749 posts, RR: 27
Reply 45, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 6302 times:

This whole thing is silly. Rating economy classes is like rating gasoline: the differences are fairly trivial although sellers go to great lengths to convince us that their product is best. Economy class travel is a commodity these days.


Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineZKSUJ From New Zealand, joined May 2004, 7107 posts, RR: 12
Reply 46, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 6144 times:

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 42):
An SQ77W at 9 abreast against an NZ 77W at 10 abreast... SQ wins hands down every time.

I agree with you. I know 3-4-3 777s are becoming the norm, but IMHO any carrier that touts themselves as being 'world class' should have the little comforts above the rest (seat width and pitch) both of which NZ has reduced when replacing the 744 with 77W. It's not like NZ is cheaper than anyone else to justify the slight decrease in comfort.

Good on them though for getting number 1.


User currently offlineBLRAviation From India, joined Feb 2009, 351 posts, RR: 14
Reply 47, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5889 times:

Just did SQ SIN-DME-IAH and return. Without a doubt one of the best economy class in the world. Marry that to the traditional SQ service, I truly am surprised that NZ was given top spot.

QR also has very wide economy class seats on their 777s, but their Airbus have the standard 18" widths, and their 787 have the bone-crushing 9 abreast similar to 10 abreast 777s.

I also dislike their "dog in the manger" philosophy.

SQ allows the armrests to be lifted full 90 degrees, so that if there are any adjacent seats empty, you can lie down. My daughter and I had 3 seats to ourselves, so we were able to lie down sleep, alternately, resting our head in the other's lap.

QR restricts their armrests to 45 degrees. "If I cannot have a passenger for that seat, neither can you benefit from it." philosophy. Sad to see such a cheap outlook from an otherwise decent airline.



I am on Twitter @BLRAviation
User currently offlineinfinit From Singapore, joined Jul 2008, 577 posts, RR: 1
Reply 48, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 5282 times:

I don't believe in rankings anymore for Economy especially.

What makes the highest ranked airline better than the second and third? We can go on till the cows come home.

I think a better approach would be to band airlines- those that offer a better product and level of service to medium-rated ones and finally a band of sub-par airlines.

Also, a distinction must be made for long haul and short haul to be valid.


User currently offlinealfa164 From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 487 posts, RR: 0
Reply 49, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4897 times:

Quoting chrisrad (Reply 24):
I along with many others would beg to differ. TG and MH were recently about the only airlines to offer 34inch pitch in Y class. MH has won best economy class on a few occasions alone.

Unfortunately for the, this wasn't a poll asking "Which airline has the most seat pitch?" It was a poll about overall comfort and service in economy class.... and TG and MH simply don't make the cut.


User currently offlinemotorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 50, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 4488 times:

Quoting BLRAviation (Reply 47):
I truly am surprised that NZ was given top spot.

Have you flown NZ? And if so, in long-haul in Y? Just wondering why you're surprised, they consistently win awards for service.

Quoting infinit (Reply 48):
I think a better approach would be to band airlines- those that offer a better product and level of service to medium-rated ones and finally a band of sub-par airlines.

Agreed, although, to some degree, polls like this do give us an idea of that top tier.



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1114 posts, RR: 2
Reply 51, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4287 times:

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 49):
It was a poll about overall comfort and service in economy class.... and TG and MH simply don't make the cut.

I cannot comment on TG, but I also disagree on your assessment of MH. Many Singaporeans long pampered by SQ are happy to fly MH precisely because their service quality is comparable, is much cheaper, and, arguably, the crew is less robotic compared to SQ.

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 41):
And to those of you who say SQ has the best Y-class product overall, they appear to have lost top placing in this set of ratings because of their lack of price flexibility

Lack of pricing flexiblity? Elaboration please?

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 50):
they consistently win awards for service.

Which types of awards?

Try comparing the following two lists, for one?

http://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/awards

http://www.singaporeair.com/en_UK/about-us/sia-history/sia-awards/



It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offlineZKSUJ From New Zealand, joined May 2004, 7107 posts, RR: 12
Reply 52, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3942 times:

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 50):
they consistently win awards for service.

Not for a while, we've slipped in recent years due to the degrading of our product. Sad to see really. But I still believe it is a decent enough product


User currently offlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1452 posts, RR: 2
Reply 53, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3870 times:

I am missing Icelandair, if an only narrow body airline is accepted.

Economy:
Pitch is 32" and width is 19" (seat guru) individual video screens and entertainment system on all flights.
Coffee, tea, water, sodas and juice are free. Luggage allowance 23 Kg + hand luggage.

For some perhaps a put off, but a nice airline to fly with children.


User currently offlineZKSUJ From New Zealand, joined May 2004, 7107 posts, RR: 12
Reply 54, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3858 times:

Quoting infinit (Reply 48):
I think a better approach would be to band airlines- those that offer a better product and level of service to medium-rated ones and finally a band of sub-par airlines.

Also, a distinction must be made for long haul and short haul to be valid.

I absolutely agree with you. The higher class economy products can beat each other on any given day, and it depends on customer perception


User currently offlinemotorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 55, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3679 times:

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 51):
Lack of pricing flexiblity? Elaboration please?

You'll have to ask the publisher of the article as I was quoting their criteria (as I stated).

And buddy, I wasn't making comparisons on the merits of NZ and/or SQ in my earlier post, I asked BLRaviation if he'd flown NZ. His comments about the carrier suggested he was surprised at their top placing. And thanks for finding the awards list.

I won't bother reading SQ's skite list as I already accept them as a most excellent carrier whose reputation warms the cockles of my Singaporean born heart.



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineBLRAviation From India, joined Feb 2009, 351 posts, RR: 14
Reply 56, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3133 times:

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 50):
Have you flown NZ? And if so, in long-haul in Y? Just wondering why you're surprised, they consistently win awards for service.

I haven't flown NZ, and defer to your experience with them.

No a challenge but a logical question. ...... This then raises an interesting question. If their Y is so good, how is it they are not doing better, especially on the "kangaroo route"? With a top rated economy class, surely they would be able to do increase to multiple flights per day, not just the one via Asia and one via the USA. Just a thought. After all EK, EY., QR, SQ, CX, TG and others have multiple services to LHR and to the ANZ region.

What reasons would you attribute to the airline's lack fo growth?



I am on Twitter @BLRAviation
User currently offlineFCAFLYBOY From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2006, 600 posts, RR: 0
Reply 57, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2959 times:

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 53):

I'd disagree with FI. Nice airline certainly, but nothing exceptional in economy. BA/AF/VS economy is better, IFE is a letdown on Icelandair.


User currently offlineaerorobnz From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 7209 posts, RR: 13
Reply 58, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2890 times:

NZ is good currently on the older 77E, but I have could feel the difference between the QR 9 abreast and NZ 10 Abreast seats and I was sick of being knocked by anyone at all walking past from the stick insect size right up to Pygmy hippo size. It felt tight on legroom in the skycouch row as well compared to a standard 77E seat. IFE is good but their portions are always on the small side (but quite nice to eat)

QR is overrated in the extreme. I had the worst food since AR in 2005 onboard my flights FRA-DOH-BKK, and only the second time ever I did not eat every bit of my food. DOH currently is a dump, and not worthy of a so-called 5 star carrier. seat quality and IFE screen is good,but IFE a bit limited.

Of the 6 airlines I have flown in the last week, QR was the most disappointing, followed by NZ. KL was the best so far this trip. The problem is that these ratings raise expectations leading the way for under-delivering.

Quoting BLRAviation (Reply 56):
What reasons would you attribute to the airline's lack fo growth?

1) The previous CEO
2) Lack of general brand awareness (prizes can only boost)
3) Lack of availability of slots
4) Flight timings designed to optimise AKL-LHR/AKL-HKG not LAX-LHR when they operated - even more so for HKG-LHR
5) All those carriers you mentioned do not pay 1st world wages and contracts and all of them have hubs in the middle of their routing not at one end.
6) NZ pulls a good profit given their size. Many far larger airlines made less..


User currently offlineinfinit From Singapore, joined Jul 2008, 577 posts, RR: 1
Reply 59, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2846 times:

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 58):
5) All those carriers you mentioned do not pay 1st world wages and contracts and all of them have hubs in the middle of their routing not at one end.

SQ pays well. A junior executive in SQ might get somewhere around S$3500 (US$2800) which is slightly higher than average. The cabin crew earn slightly higher with their allowances. May not sound like a lot but remember than SG has one of the lowest income taxes in the world. Top execs in SQ (like most "government-linked" companies in Sg) are paid very well too.

But agreed on the second point. NZ really is in one far corner of the world. This disadvantaged QF but moreso NZ since they're further off and their population is smaller than even Singapore.

Perhaps NZ should do with QF did, partnering with another airline. Both being in StarA, perhaps a NZ-SQ partnership would be workable?
SQ isn't doing as well as before, they're facing a lot of competition on both ends of the market. And now that QF has gotten into bed with EK, NZ could increase their prowess on the kangaroo routes.
NZ could benefit from SQ's larger network


User currently offlinetoobz From Finland, joined Jan 2010, 792 posts, RR: 0
Reply 60, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2776 times:

Maybe I'm misunderstanding..a junior executive earning 2800 USD is good pay?
I know flight attendants at DL that make 3 times that.


User currently offlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1452 posts, RR: 2
Reply 61, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2598 times:

Quoting FCAFLYBOY (Reply 57):
I'd disagree with FI. Nice airline certainly, but nothing exceptional in economy. BA/AF/VS economy is better, IFE is a letdown on Icelandair.

I do not know about VS, but I have flown with BA and AF narrow bodies recently, worse seat pitch and no IFE at all.
If there are better cabins, than it does not cover the range of airplanes used.


User currently offlineaerorobnz From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 7209 posts, RR: 13
Reply 62, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2580 times:

Quoting infinit (Reply 59):
Perhaps NZ should do with QF did, partnering with another airline

They have. VA, and CX. When you're a small airline lots of targeted individual partners makes more sense than one big airline screwing the smaller one for all the advantage.


User currently offlinemotorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 63, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2440 times:

Quoting BLRAviation (Reply 56):
If their Y is so good, how is it they are not doing better, especially on the "kangaroo route"?

Strictly speaking, NZ don't fly the Kangaroo route as this links Australia with Europe via Asia. New Zealand is not part of Australia (we do not have kangaroos). And it may surprise you that NZ is financially a very successful airline, but they are a smaller airline.

Quoting infinit (Reply 59):
perhaps a NZ-SQ partnership would be workable?

You need to brush up on your airline history, specifically that of Ansett-Air New Zealand-Singapore Airlines in the late 1990's.



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineDarkSnowyNight From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1367 posts, RR: 3
Reply 64, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1811 times:

Quoting mikeology (Reply 9):
I'd have thought JetBlue (B6) would have made top 10 as well

Yeah, me too. Both hard and soft products here are far better than average. 34" seat pitch, on a non-Boeing narrowbody and free baggage ought to be worthy of some type of recognition.

Quoting JBLUA320 (Reply 36):
It says Virgin America's seat width is 19.7"... I've been on VX countless times and it's a nice product, but there is no way that seat is almost 20" wide. Or am I just crazy?? Can someone confirm? I know SeatGuru also says 19.7" but that just seems... huge!

That does seem like a lot doesn't it? I do fly VX an awful lot, and their seats do seem wider, but I'm not sure about 20"! I'll have a look Thurs morning when I fly them to NY (although I should caveat that this is their MCS as opposed to Main
Cabin, but I think they're the same) .

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 45):
Rating economy classes is like rating gasoline: the differences are fairly trivial although sellers go to great lengths to convince us that their product is best.

I think you need to start flying. The differences are actually pretty profound once you get past a few hundred thousand miles a year.

Yes, it is indeed a commodity, but that doesn't mean they're all the same. I'll always favor VX & B6 because they know how to outfit a plane much better than the legacies, they are very price competitive and they know what frequency means.

If it were the bad old days when your miles were only good on the actual airlines whose metal you flew, UA, AA, & DL might still have a shot. But when I can get my ST miles on KL, OW on CX, QF & BA, and codeshare domestically on VX, B6, & AS, why on earth should I put up with DL''s 31" seat pitch, and having to connect in ATL for more than VX charges to get from LA to NY non-stop in their Y+?

The only real plus I can see is for folks who are regional dependant. And even then, that's tolerated more than wanted.

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 2):
I'd scrub Virgin America and put Swiss as the number two.

Why? I haven't had a chance to fly Swiss in Y, but I've flown all classes on VX, and honestly, they're a tough act to beat.

For what it's worth, I've flown Swiss a few times in J and yes, they were great!

Quoting oc2dc (Reply 5):
Yes, Virgin America has a relatively nice product, but do they take service into consideration? If so, perhaps Virgin Atlantic would take its place as #2.

What are asking by service? VS certainly has an edge if you're talking about a better soft product being that they go overseas, have comp food on board, etc. But, IMHO, VX is a little better hard product wise.

Quoting chrisrad (Reply 24):
TG and MH were recently about the only airlines to offer 34inch pitch in Y class.

Maybe in asia, but world wide? B6 certainly does have 34" pitch, except where they have 38".

Quoting NobleRT (Reply 25):
I have always been extremely comfortable in CX seats. I'm 6'1 and I always feel I have more than enough room and comfort. I would have loved to see CX on this list.

Same here. I've never had problems with CX in Y, and would put them up there in any list involving Y being a good thing,  
Quoting nicholasjet (Reply 35):
But aren't most economy cabins mediocre. If they were all amazing why would people pay extra for premium economy or business or even first. It's a difficult one to rate I think because in one way the airlines can vary so much, but on the other hand we get upset over a couple of inches *ahem*

It's not a matter of them being "Amazing". I'd fly VX without all the moodlighting (in fact, it's probably my least favorite thing about them; it does seem gimmicky). It's more about a product that manages to not piss you off. VX & B6 score best here for me (and most of my company for that matter).

And for getting upset over a few inches... It kind of is a huge deal. When there isn't much to begin with, a few inches start to matter. There's a much bigger difference between 34" & 31" seat pitch in Y than there is between 66" and 80" in J.



Posting without Knowledge is simply Tolerated Vandalism... We are the Vandals.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
My Top 10 Special Livery Of All Time posted Tue Aug 28 2001 19:13:57 by Magicalchaz
Top 10 Benefits Of Being An ArmChair CEO posted Sun Jul 22 2001 06:26:30 by SFOintern
Top 10 Airlines In Terms Of Size... posted Mon May 28 2001 17:01:34 by 767-332ER
Top 10 Of Your Airlines posted Sat Aug 19 2000 17:45:52 by HL
European Top 10 Airports 2012 - Some Big Changes posted Thu Feb 28 2013 05:47:46 by factsonly
LY To Have True Lie Flat In C By End Of 2013 posted Sat Dec 15 2012 13:24:03 by amirs
New Orleans To Be In Top 10 SWA Airports posted Tue Sep 11 2012 15:43:49 by airliner371
10 Year Anniversary Of AN Into Administration posted Tue Sep 13 2011 03:46:57 by richardw
Irish 27/10: 50th Anniversary Of Irish Jet Flights posted Mon Dec 13 2010 09:42:51 by kaitak
Top 10 International Cargo Carriers 2009 posted Thu Oct 28 2010 19:04:50 by trex8