I'll be travelling Asiana ICN - JFK in business class in May. Any advice about what to expect? I reserved seats on the upper deck and curious about whether anyone else has flown this route?

I'll be travelling Asiana ICN - JFK in business class in May. Any advice about what to expect? I reserved seats on the upper deck and curious about whether anyone else has flown this route?



First of all, welcome to FlyerTalk.

Regarding Asiana's Business, I would say it's one of the worst Business class, if it's not the worst. If you do some quick searches, you'll find a lot of members mentioning Asiana's Business class as a horrible product.

In a nutshell, I suggest you to avoid at all cost.

I flew Asiana's Business a few weeks ago on the upper deck from ICN to LAX, and it was as miserable as it could possibly be.

I would say their Business class is more like Premium Economy class of other recognised carriers around the world.

I'll be travelling Asiana ICN - JFK in business class in May. Any advice about what to expect? I reserved seats on the upper deck and curious about whether anyone else has flown this route?

Seats are comparable with the older generation of AF/LH seats with better legroom (think of UA's business class seats in the mid-late 90's with 50+ inches of legroom). Service and food are both very very good. Lounge facilities in ICN are very nice as well (showers, slumber rooms, etc).

Seats are comparable with the older generation of AF/LH seats with better legroom (think of UA's business class seats in the mid-late 90's with 50+ inches of legroom).



FYI, there are 32 seats on the upper deck with 4 exit row seats and a straight stairway. Logically, how could that be 50+ inches of legroom. According to my experience, it would be somewhere around 45 inches. It can't be more than that.

I flew Asiana's Business a few weeks ago on the upper deck from ICN to LAX, and it was as miserable as it could possibly be.

I would say their Business class is more like Premium Economy class of other recognised carriers around the world.

Out of curiosity, why did you fly Asiana AGAIN just a few weeks ago after you had such a miserable experience the last time?

Personally, I've only taken Asiana twice and as someone who usually flies United, I was extremely surprised at the level of service. The seats in Business on the 747 are an older style, though.

FYI, there are 32 seats on the upper deck with 4 exit row seats and a straight stairway. Logically, how could that be 50+ inches of legroom. According to my experience, it would be somewhere around 45 inches. It can't be more than that.

A friend of mine who also flew measured it. And your source is...?

Out of curiosity, why did you fly Asiana AGAIN just a few weeks ago after you had such a miserable experience the last time?

Personally, I've only taken Asiana twice and as someone who usually flies United, I was extremely surprised at the level of service. The seats in Business on the 747 are an older style, though.



That was a few weeks ago. To be exact, about 7 weeks ago, got it?

A friend of mine who also flew measured it. And your source is...?



I estimated with my foot-long ruler. It was row 15 on the upper deck last row, if you're wondering.

I estimated with my foot-long ruler. It was row 15 on the upper deck last row, if you're wondering.

Ah, it was an estimate .

mburkin, just refer to my first post above. Enough said.

Ah, it was an estimate .


I would be surprised if it's possible to pack 32 seats of 50+ inches legrooms and a nomal exit row. Also, there are lavatories at both fore and aft cabin. BTW, I used the word "estimate" because I didn't measure the pitch with the error range of +|-0.125/2 inches. "50+" inches can't be said with the word "measure" not even "estimate"

For your info, few recent threads about Asiana Business.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=521544&highlight=asiana+business
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=522955&highlight=asiana+business
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=511368&highlight=asiana+business

@mburkin:
First of all, welcome to FT. You will find a lot of helpful ressources here and most of the people are more than willing to help with their experience and give valuable comments about everything that is related to travel and flights. However, you should always take your time and have a look at previous posts of the people who answer your questions. It will be very interesting sometimes.
FWIW, I flew Asiana in all three classes already and I am booked in longhaul business (FRA-ICN, ICN-SYD and back, although one leg in first) starting next Sunday and I am looking forward to it. Asiana is a very decent airline with very good and attentive service. The seats might be a bit dated, but still okay. In my personal opinion, Asiana beats UA hands down. But maybe that's just me.

Cheers,
Torsten

Personally, I've only taken Asiana twice and as someone who usually flies United, I was extremely surprised at the level of service. The seats in Business on the 747 are an older style, though.

For people usually flies UA or other US carriers, of course you will surprise. But for people usually fly asia carriers like CX, SQ, JL, NH, you will find that OZ had really ancient seats in both F and C class in their 747, plus no PTV in Y either.

However, you should always take your time and have a look at previous posts of the people who answer your questions. It will be very interesting sometimes.


Totally agree, actually there had been plenty of post about OZ business class recently, most of the US routes all have similiar service (ICN-LAX/ORD/JFK), I suspect they all have the same menu too. Moreover, OZ actually had a website flyasiana.com which provide many information that you may not know. It does not make any sense to start a new thread with the same question all over again.

I don't have any experience with OZ, but I might be able to help with the debate about legroom.

While there can be variances between different aircraft, Skytrax lists Asiana's business class pitch at 50". Source: http://www.airlinequality.com/Product/seats_asia.htm

I don't have any experience with OZ, but I might be able to help with the debate about legroom.

While there can be variances between different aircraft, Skytrax lists Asiana's business class pitch at 50". Source: http://www.airlinequality.com/Product/seats_asia.htm



Please note that some figures represent new product installations that may not be completed or available across an airline's whole fleet of aircraft.


Only Premier Business

i'll fly OZ any day over any US carriers. Yes, their 747 biz seats are older (but by no means falling apart) and have no individual video system but still quite comfortable.. and service and catering.. you'll be very pleased with. they're consistently above average.

I don't have any experience with OZ, but I might be able to help with the debate about legroom.

While there can be variances between different aircraft, Skytrax lists Asiana's business class pitch at 50". Source: http://www.airlinequality.com/Product/seats_asia.htm

There is nothing to argue about, because even on Asiana 's website had listed 50" is for premier business, and premiem economy have adjustable headrests in the seats, which I did not see any of those on 747. I guess that is only for A330 and 777, since those aircrafts are all newly delivered, which all have new seats in C and Y.

http://us.flyasiana.com/travelplanner/travelplanner_inflight_businessclass.asp

There is nothing to argue about, because even on Asiana 's website had listed 50" is for premier business, and premiem economy have adjustable headrests in the seats, which I did not see any of those on 747. I guess that is only for A330 and 777, since those aircrafts are all newly delivered, which all have new seats in C and Y.

http://us.flyasiana.com/travelplanner/travelplanner_inflight_businessclass.asp



Asiana doesn't have premium economy. If you were to mean economy on 772 and 333, they are regular economy, but IIRC economy seats are equipped with adjustable headrests while all other aircrafts have non-adjustable seats on economy and even on business. Not sure about first.

N227UA, I think your point about OZ's seats and its comfort was made in your first reply. Having flown OZ 747 upperdeck, I agree with N227 that the seats are certainly sub-par to current industry standards. However, service wise, OZ is at the top of their game and leading the industry. So, I would suggest to you that you try OZ C product if the fare is reasonable. You certainly won't be disappointed with their service. If you want to try different and new OZ business product where they feature lie-flat, angled flat seats, I would suggest you connect in LAX (later flight, which resumes its operation in late March on their brand new B772ER) or SEA (if you are UA flier, your option is much nicer by flying to LAX on PS flights from JFK).

If price is not a concern, I would say, NH, JL, UA (although UA C seat is still older version but more comfortable than OZ's C in 747s), all connecting via NRT, would be best solution to experiencing excellent business class product. Otherwise, you could also try KE's C seats. i think they have new planes flying this route (JFK-ICN) and have new lie-flat seats in business.

Good luck and enjoy the business class experience.

N227UA, I think your point about OZ's seats and its comfort was made in your first reply. Having flown OZ 747 upperdeck, I agree with N227 that the seats are certainly sub-par to current industry standards. However, service wise, OZ is at the top of their game and leading the industry. So, I would suggest to you that you try OZ C product if the fare is reasonable. You certainly won't be disappointed with their service. If you want to try different and new OZ business product where they feature lie-flat, angled flat seats, I would suggest you connect in LAX (later flight, which resumes its operation in late March on their brand new B772ER) or SEA (if you are UA flier, your option is much nicer by flying to LAX on PS flights from JFK).

If price is not a concern, I would say, NH, JL, UA (although UA C seat is still older version but more comfortable than OZ's C in 747s), all connecting via NRT, would be best solution to experiencing excellent business class product. Otherwise, you could also try KE's C seats. i think they have new planes flying this route (JFK-ICN) and have new lie-flat seats in business.

Good luck and enjoy the business class experience.



You forgot to mention the resuming non-stop service between SFO and ICN by UA. There are a few options, including flying on SQ between SFO and ICN, which I think the OP would be interested in.

You can do JFK-SFO (PS by United) to SQ to ICN.

That said, I really am a HUGE fan of OZ - if you book on a 777, even the slightly older non-lie flat seats are quite comfortable and of course, the service is impeccable. I find it one of the best carriers to north Asia and superior to NH's old (tired) business class by a wide margin. They do not have the most modern seats or IFE but I find it very comfortable. If I had a choice and the price were the same I would probably fly SQ, but we know that normally is not the case - often OZ is 40-50% cheaper in C than SQ.

N227UA, yea, I forgot to mention the SFO-ICN on UA. :D In fact, I had been waiting for it to come back.

If it weren't all those UA promotions (triple miles, double miles, elite upgrades, SWU, etc.... :D), I would certainly give those other "premium" carriers a try. Like N227UA, I am somewhat price sensitive. Also the fact that UA gives me E+ seats, better chances at upgrades, ect, I would most likely choose to fly UA (and that UA had been cheaper on most part than KE and OZ to ICN). But everytime I had redeemed my miles with UA for C or F, I had and will always make sure (to) utilize(d) other carriers like SQ, OZ, NH, TG.

I would say their Business class is more like Premium Economy class of other recognised carriers around the world.


That bad Huh?? wow sure ain't gonna use'em.

First of all, welcome to FlyerTalk.

Regarding Asiana's Business, I would say it's one of the worst Business class, if it's not the worst. If you do some quick searches, you'll find a lot of members mentioning Asiana's Business class as a horrible product.

In a nutshell, I suggest you to avoid at all cost.

I flew Asiana's Business a few weeks ago on the upper deck from ICN to LAX, and it was as miserable as it could possibly be.

I would say their Business class is more like Premium Economy class of other recognised carriers around the world.

I really would disagree. Admittedly if you are used to lie flat seats then you will be disappointed, but there is plenty of leg room (compared with even the most generous premium economy I know) and the service and food is excellent. I think describing Asiana as "miserable" and to be avoided at all costs is overly harsh. Especially as their fares are usually quite reasonable.

I really would disagree. Admittedly if you are used to lie flat seats then you will be disappointed, but there is plenty of leg room (compared with even the most generous premium economy I know) and the service and food is excellent. I think describing Asiana as "miserable" and to be avoided at all costs is overly harsh. Especially as their fares are usually quite reasonable.



So far, I've flown on lie flat seat only once and it was angled. Guess what, it was Asiana's Premier Business. To me both Asiana's Business and Asiana's Premier Business seem not appealing at all. It's not the matter of lie flat or not. Their seats aren't designed to be comfortable. Their Business is, as you know, truly miserable. Can you imagine unmovable headrest on Business seat? Also, legrest comes up at a very small angle. Footrest, that isn't worth having one. Their Premier Business is a little bit better, but still not comfortable. Arerests disturb you when you make angled flat postition. Also footrest, this is really annoying at angled flat postion. Regarding fare, that's ridiculously unreasonable. The highest cent per mile!

I really would disagree. Admittedly if you are used to lie flat seats then you will be disappointed, but there is plenty of leg room (compared with even the most generous premium economy I know) and the service and food is excellent. I think describing Asiana as "miserable" and to be avoided at all costs is overly harsh. Especially as their fares are usually quite reasonable.

I don't know how you would say "plenty of legroom" ? I would say 747 on UA upper deck does have plenty of legroom. OZ C class upper deck has 32 seats, whereas UA C class upper deck only has 26 seats.

Excellent service and food does not compromise bad seat and PTV on a 10+ hours long flight like ORD-ICN or JFK-ICN, on short flight like ICN-HKG that is ok.

I don't know how you would say "plenty of legroom" ? I would say 747 on UA upper deck does have plenty of legroom. OZ C class upper deck has 32 seats, whereas UA C class upper deck only has 26 seats.

Excellent service and food does not compromise bad seat and PTV on a 10+ hours long flight like ORD-ICN or JFK-ICN, on short flight like ICN-HKG that is ok.

I'm 6'6" (198 cm). Have flown regularly (and comfortably) on 11-hour flights ICN-LHR. I've usually been able to sleep for most of the flight (perhaps that's why I didn't notice the "bad" PTV).

Please try to keep this thread on topic with comments about Asiana and comparitive airline service (positive or negative) rather than meta-comments about posters and their postings.

Thanks
Sean (B747-437B)
Moderator
OAASPFFP

Am I correct when thinking that OZ have new business class in their 777s?

I would be surprised if it's possible to pack 32 seats of 50+ inches legrooms and a nomal exit row. Also, there are lavatories at both fore and aft cabin. BTW, I used the word "estimate" because I didn't measure the pitch with the error range of +|-0.125/2 inches. "50+" inches can't be said with the word "measure" not even "estimate"

For your info, few recent threads about Asiana Business.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=521544&highlight=asiana+business
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=522955&highlight=asiana+business
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=511368&highlight=asiana+business

Ever thought about how many seats there are on the upper deck of a UA 747?

Check it out and you will find that OZ compares quite favorably.

Regarding Asiana's Business, I would say it's one of the worst Business class, if it's not the worst. If you do some quick searches, you'll find a lot of members mentioning Asiana's Business class as a horrible product.

In a nutshell, I suggest you to avoid at all cost.

I flew Asiana's Business a few weeks ago on the upper deck from ICN to LAX, and it was as miserable as it could possibly be.

I would say their Business class is more like Premium Economy class of other recognised carriers around the world.

I flew LAX-ICN on OZ biz class about 3 years ago but I don't remember the leg room being tight (I had the exit row). I believe the tightest leg room I experienced was on NH (old biz seat). Old biz seats are not up to leading airlines but I wouldn't call it Premium Economy though...

BTW, N227UA has been on anti-OZ campaign ever since his bad experience.

You can do JFK-SFO (PS by United) to SQ to ICN.

That said, I really am a HUGE fan of OZ - if you book on a 777, even the slightly older non-lie flat seats are quite comfortable and of course, the service is impeccable. I find it one of the best carriers to north Asia and superior to NH's old (tired) business class by a wide margin. They do not have the most modern seats or IFE but I find it very comfortable. If I had a choice and the price were the same I would probably fly SQ, but we know that normally is not the case - often OZ is 40-50% cheaper in C than SQ.

What is the recline on the 777 older seats?

Ever thought about how many seats there are on the upper deck of a UA 747?

Check it out and you will find that OZ compares quite favorably.


26 vs 32. That's a big difference.



BTW, N227UA has been on anti-OZ campaign ever since his bad experience.


So WHAT? :rolleyes:

So WHAT? :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]


....because it's annoying to read about it over and over again.... @:-)
....and bitter people are sad......... :(

I don't give a darn what N227UA says.
Next time he "ever" flies, he will certainly fly with OZ. :D
I know it damn well.
:)

....because it's annoying to read about it over and over again.... @:-)

It annoys me. Anyone else?

Suprised to hear @ negative experiences on Asiana...My exp. has been nothing but positive, esp. the FAs! Not to mention the food, I'm also shocked to hear of the 747 service, as I usu. fly from SFO to ICN on a 777. Any suggestions would be welcomed!

It annoys me. Anyone else?

I'll chime in! Definetely annoying. And - unless I have overread a couple of posts - all because of an isolated experience, right?

I flew OZ Biz class three times in March plus one longhaul in F. Great experience. Period.
Biz was SIN-ICN in New Biz (6 hour red-eye), ICN-SYD and SYD-ICN in "old" Biz. Old Biz is still better than UA Biz IMHO. Only thing I did not like there was the IFE, but then again, it is not the most important part for me, personally.

Cheers,
Torsten

I, as a consumer, reserve the right to evaluate the quality of those products. If you don't want to read it, simply don't read it. Otherwise, I understand that you read it because you decided to do so.

there service is great and the food is good to, my only complaint ( and this was in F) was the IFE. the thing is ancient compared to what SQ and CX have in F class.

How is your opinion of the whole Keumho Group? Are the other parts of the conglomerate as bad as the airline? I cannot even imagine how poor the service at KE would be if OZ had not been born when the dictatorship ended.

Just like NH has finally overtaken JL in Japan, I find OZ a far more energetic company than Korean.

I, as a consumer, reserve the right to evaluate the quality of those products. If you don't want to read it, simply don't read it. Otherwise, I understand that you read it because you decided to do so.

I, as a consumer, reserve the right to evaluate the quality of those products. If you don't want to read it, simply don't read it. Otherwise, I understand that you read it because you decided to do so.

...and we, as FTers, reserve the right to point out that your constant rehashing of an isolated incident and bashing of Asiana due to one bad experience is annoying to read over and over again.... @:-)

As for the other poster looking for information on Asiana. IFE is not a big deal for me, so I don't find the lack of Asiana's much of a deterrant (although the new one is great, and the internet was pretty fast when I used it to Shanghai recently). The service is top-notch and friendly, the food is far superior than any American carrier I've been on, and the planes always seem to be sparkling clean when I step on them.... They also serve Chevas Regal in economy and 18yr. old Chevas in Business!!!!!! I hope that you enjoy your flight! :) ^

Our friend N227UA(or better N227OZ) has a good point here. Damn good point and that. ^ ;)

But how can we skip his posts here? :o








If you don't want to read it, simply don't read it. Otherwise, I understand that you read it because you decided to do so.

I don't give a darn what N227UA says.
Next time he "ever" flies, he will certainly fly with OZ. :D
I know it damn well.
:)

Our friend N227UA(or better N227OZ) has a good point here. Damn good point and that.

But how can we skip his posts here?



Since you don't give a darn what I say, doesn't that mean that you already have been skipping my posts? :confused:

On the horns of a dilemma ;)


Since you don't give a darn what I say, doesn't that mean that you already have been skipping my posts? :confused: