San Gottardo

I have a choice between

1) Changing my work agenda (which is a bit tricky) and flying from Rio de Janeiro to GRU and on to CDG on AF 772 with a BEST cabin and then on to my final destination
2) Not changing my work agenda and flying from Rio de Janeiro on KL 772 with new WBC to AMS and then on to CDG and on to my final destination

Total flight duration is similar, arrival time acceptable in both cases, I need to make two transfers anyway (either AMS and CDG or GRU and CDG). The decision hinges on which airline will give me better quality sleep and more pleasant flight.

The AF BEST product is great for me because I sleep well on it and the single seats offer lots of privacy, food is OK, the IFE nice, and I like the AF cabin service. KLM will not offer the privacy of the AF seat, but what about the rest? How is sleeping quality, food, IFE, cabin service? Haven't been on a KLM longhaul in ages (booked more than once, but always changed plans last minute), so I have no idea what to expect.

Is the BEST cabin worth me changing my other commitments?

Thanks for sharing any experiences

TLVtraveler

Service is better with KL in my opinion, the lounge in AMS is nice, food&wine are both excellent out of AMS and the new J seats are very comfortable for sleeping (relatively wide, flat and soft).
The major disadvantage is the lack of direct aisle access... If you had a choice between AF new 777 or KL's 744 with 1A, 4A or 4E I would have taken KL any day...
Is your flight heavily booked? if it's relatively empty I would still go with KL and hope for an empty seat next to me.
And let's not forget, when you fly KL you get a delft blue house!

In conclusion both products are excellent, with AF you have direct aisle access but service is usually not as good as KL in my opinion.

Goldorak

I have never flown the new KL J so I cannot comment on the quality of the product, although all opinions Inread here on FT were very positive about it. Of course the non-direct aisle access is a negative point compared to AF. Regarding the service, it is of course entirely person/crew-dependent. My last long-haul KL flight was disappointing for the service + mediocre food, but I consider this as an "accident" because I rather had always good experience with them. But, for AF, I have to say that all my last recent long-haul flights in J were excellent in terms of service. Overall, I prefer the AF service and AF food over KL, but of course my French chromosomes have a responsibility in this preference .

TLVtraveler

I noticed that KL's service is almost always better out of AMS compared to coming back to AMS (no idea why, just my feeling).

KL's new J is actually relatively private for it's type, the seats are at a slight angle with one a few inches forward, plus the "Beirut wall" between two seats makes it feel private...

orbitmic

I think both are good. Indeed, KL's 777 is less private but at the same time it is a fine seat on the whole. Food, I would say that KL has improved quite a bit recently. I would say that their second meals are a clear notch above AF's while AF's first meals are a bit better than KL's usually.

Just like TLVtraveler, I would personally choose KL's 744 over AF's new 777s(despite my "French chromosomes" ), would choose AF's new 777s over KL's new 777s, but I would not take a less convenient trip to achieve either of those two things.

Service wise, most have very good crew. Many of the best crews that I have had in my life have been AF's. A few of my worst have been AF too but that is extremely rare. That said, I have felt far more "important" as Platinum for life on KL compared to AF. On AF, I think that status is often something that is more frowned upon than anything else (not always), while on KL they have often gone out of their way.

My April KL trips to/from PTY were a case in point, notably the return when I was literally showered with attention, privileges, and even gift in the form of a second little house (woohoo!) by the purser who noticed my very recent birthday. It even earned me a bit of jealousy from my partner as she wondered if that lady had a soft spot for me! (she was wrong of course!)

johan rebel

As distinct from the Berlin and Chinese Walls, I presume?

Johan

TLVtraveler

I thought someone might comment on it
The metal shield between seats has holes that looks like bullet holes, the term "Beirut wall" isn't actually mine, I read it somewhere a while back (I think it was in this forum or maybe a blog, can't remember...) and thought the description was funny and somewhat true. It's an interesting design for KL, what's the purpose of the holes?? it's not like you can communicate with your seatmate better with them...

ulxima

I had both this year.
My choice is AF, last flight out of PVG (27th July, 772) was superb.

Enjoy it.
Ulxima

San Gottardo

So I took the KL flight, followed by two AF flights (one shot haul, one on a 772). The KL seat was ok, ok for sleeping, slightly better than expected (but still insufficient) for storage, food ok but service much much too long, cabin service very friendly but somewhat rustic.

I clearly prefer the AF Best cabins.

TLVtraveler

I understand what you mean about the service, meal service with KL takes way too long... especially on shorter long hauls (5-7 hours), if the first meal service takes 2-2.5 hours and the last 1-1.5 hours is spent on the second meal or preparing the cabin, you are left with a short sleep time...

In the end I think both products are excellent so it's up to the most convenient schedule.

orbitmic

To be honest, I have had very fast and very slow service on both AF and KL. My last KL long haul J had dinner completed within 1h30 of take off which is about as good as it gets bar a few exceptions like CWLCY Eastbound.

San Gottardo

Tastes may differ, but to me neither is "excellent". The new AF is a very very big improvement compared to NEV and the seat itself is excellent in terms of space, storage space and because of its direct aisle access. But to be "excellent", both would have a cabin layout with direct aisle access from all seats (KL doesn't), there would be mattresses (like on EK or OpenSkies and certainly many other airlines which I currently do not remember), better food, a wider choice of wines of AF, and internet on board. That would be "excellent". Right now I would give AF a B+ and KL a C+. AF is good enough for me, I don't avoid them when the flight has the BEST cabin, but I wouldn't call them "excellent".

orbitmic

But that means excluding LX, right?!

I think your examples show that if you want it all, then very few airlines (if any?!) would work and the "excellent" category if any.

I totally agree with you mattresses are great, but EK or QR which give them include some planes with a very outdated J without privacy (others better). OS give sheets (no mattress) which I actually love but not all seats have aisle access (same set up as LX) but then their food is outstanding. AZ also has great food and 1-2-1 but no mattress and from the feeling one gets when trying to contact them, I'm not even sure they have internet in their offices, let alone their planes! Openskies has the mattress but cabins are very updated and portable entertainment complete rubbish. Etihad has good food and wine and privacy but no mattress and some of the slowest meal services around. AB and IB have good internet (but not free), 1-2-1 excellent seats, and very good food but no mattresses.

All the standard greats (CX, SQ, JL, NH, ME3, OS, TK, NZ...) fail on one or more of your criteria so in fact I can't think of a single airline that would make your excellent category?

So personally, I'd agree calling AF BEST and KL 744 excellent within the current landscape, but I'm waiting to find the outstanding airline that will trump them all!

San Gottardo

There are two ways to look at this: the "Olympic medal" way ("which one is the best among the ones in the race?"), or the "Baccalaureat way" ("give a certain grade to all candidates that meet certain criteria").

If I take the "Baccalureat" then according to my own personal criteria, few airlines I can think off right now would be "excellent", although a number come close.

So for my travel choices what I do is a sort of "Baccalaureat approach" where I lump them together into categories:

* Cabin products I look forward to flying: QR on the 787, A350, A380, and refurbished Airbus
* Cabin products that are absolutely good and I don't complain at all when having to travel on them: AF BEST, LX, CX, SQ, NH, KE, EK on the A380, EY, OS.
* Cabin products which I take if none of the above is available of if there is a benefit in terms of travel time or scheduling: BA and Openskies, KL new, LH new, DL, new AA, AC, EK on the 777 and on the Airbus, QR on the 777 and on the non-refurbished A332
* Cabin products which I take only if really there is no other way or if avoiding them would be a major hassle, but an acceptable transfer on one of the above is still better than a nonstop on one of these: old AF, old LH, old KL, UA, TP, ME, JJ
* Ones that I haven't tried but would suspect to be good or very good are IB, TK and orbitmic, you got me curious about AZ.
* I am not familiar with others or at least not with their recent version (SK, AY, SN), or I just can't think of that airline's existence right now.

Of course there are differences, and not every airline is as good as another one in the same bucket, but there is no point in being more precise as I don't want to create a ranking of the world's airlines but give a list of preferences to the people who sometimes do travel planning for me. Obviously other aspects like nonstop vs. transfer connection (Europe-HKG nonstop is better than Eur-HKG with QR), ground service, lounge quality if stop is more than 1 hour, etc. come into play. Sounds like a complicated algorithm, but usually it isn't, because usually there isn't much choice. Schedule is what drives my choice, and when I am looking for instance for a "Rio de Janeiro-Zurich that gets me into Zurich before noon", well then there isn't much choice anyway: fly AZ GIG-FCO-ZRH, or fly from SDU to GRU on whatever and connect to LX. Or "leave LAX to Europe after 8pm" - on most days the only flight is on BA. "Go from GRU to LAX", KE operates three times a week, so it has to be AA or transfer somewhere on most other days.

And a detail: "aisle access". To be honest I am not too fussy whether EVERY seat has direct aisle access. What matters to me, who is always in a window seat, is that there are window seats with aisle access. LX (because you mentioned them) has that, KL not. AF does, but there I'd be disappointed on the few occasions that I do not fly alone.

I presume most frequent travelers chose their flights like this. For some, mileage collection may play an additional role, for many it doesn't.

I leave the scientific and pseudo-scientific approaches to magazines, surveys, market research, etc. For my own planning purposes this works well. And after my flight this week with KL I do not put them into one of the top two categories.

orbitmic

Lots of great point I fully agree with, some of which I'd propose to rephrase differently (not "instead" but "in addition" to your phrasing). And I too am very much the "baccalaureat" version, but I guess that to me the "excellent category" already exists and I'll keep the hypothetical non-existent yet for outstanding!

I'm surprised by some of your inclusions in the different categories. For instance, I am surprised you put QR above all others on those aircrafts. I love the QR A380, but even the QR 788 I would put a bit below some of the other ones you mention (usually no mattress, no bar, which I never thought I'd like but actually nicely breaks a long trip, etc). Food has become less good too in recent months, so I would personally not put it above, say, OS or JL which I am also surprised not to find in your list. By contrast, while I really like KE, I would put it a clear notch below personally.

Again it is hard to put together the KL new (very different on the 744 and 772) as well as AA new and DL new (even more different for each aircraft). I don't really see a reason to put the new AA 77W in a different category from CX for instance, exactly the same seat, food a bit less good but CX J food is nowhere near stellar anyway, etc. DL has its lovers and detractors, again, the seats vary a lot.

BA, I would put it there for a UD 744 but then probably not on a 777 or A380 or 787 which are unfortunately becoming more and more dominant. I'd personally downgrade the new LH by one category too, to me it is definitely less good than the new AA on both 77W and 772/788 and the new DL on any aircraft.

I confirm I love AZ (but it will change soon to become more similar to the latest EY) and the new IB. TK has great soft product but the hard is less great (2-2-2).

SN is exactly the same seat as LX and OS, food less good than OS but in my view a bit better than LX (which I find good but not great in J).

AY is the same seat type as CX/AF BEST/AA 77W so excellent hard product, I love their OW E/S lounge (sauna in transit anyone? Stylish, good food, rubbish drinks), and their food is strangely good in general but service feels a bit "utilitarian" and certainly not luxurious.

SK I don't know but feel is probably a bit similar bar a less exclusive lounge because of sheer traffic.

Actually, KL 744 does just like LX on some of its window seats (lower proportion than LX) but not KL new 777. That said, it seems that KL will soon change their J seat anyway to make it closer to the new AF!

LX (OS, etc) have both aisle access windows and non-aisle access ones which take me to the next point, status matters not so much for miles but for what you get. E.g with your HON you are guaranteed a throne or window solo seat any time, so why should you worry about other people not getting the same, for you it should be as good as every seat being a throne! By contrast, for me, even with *A G status it is pot luck so I would worry about that more.

Conversely, my BA GGL (or Gold would work just as well) guarantees 744 UD windows on virtually any flight even booked late. By contrast, many statusless people will see they need to pay €100 or so extra to get such a seat on BA so will avoid it like plague. Same with the AF BEST J where we get the windows and others do not.


Agree with all that but would add that to me, day and night flight is also a huge difference. For instance, if flying West coast, I'll often take BA out (nicer service, better perks as GGL) but AA back (better seat to sleep in). Same goes on other flight combinations!