Asiana Club - seating on asiana-comparing to UA

Looking at flying Asiana ORD to ICN next month. This would be my first time on Asiana (and first time to ICN). How is it for economy class? And how easy/hard is it to upgrade to C as a *G? from all I've read, this sounds like a better flying experience than UA. Would appreciate your thoughts on this.
Thank you!

Looking at flying Asiana ORD to ICN next month. This would be my first time on Asiana (and first time to ICN). How is it for economy class? And how easy/hard is it to upgrade to C as a *G? from all I've read, this sounds like a better flying experience than UA. Would appreciate your thoughts on this.
Thank you!



No doubt that flying UA will be A LOT BETTER experience. Have been on this particular flight OZ235 from ORD to ICN, it was pretty much rubbish. If you were expecting unpaid upgrade meaning not using miles, I would say don't expect upgrade at all. This flight is operated by 744 combi and there are only a few business seats which are very old, probably 1980s style. Anyway both economy and business are dirt, so you really wouldn't want to be on Asiana. I can't imagine why some nuts have written that being OZ235 is better than being on any xPacific UA flight.

Edited to add: In a nutshell, avoid OZ at all cost. Because, you get a lot less legroom. No PTV available. Terrible movies in circulation usually. Meal is not any better. You won't be treated better than OZ's *G members, who are required to qualify *G with ridiculously little flying.

Looking at flying Asiana ORD to ICN next month. This would be my first time on Asiana (and first time to ICN). How is it for economy class? And how easy/hard is it to upgrade to C as a *G? from all I've read, this sounds like a better flying experience than UA. Would appreciate your thoughts on this.
Thank you!

Upgrade very unlikely. (without using miles)

The experience is likely to be far better than UA. I fly often in economy on 744- the seats are old but good pitch. Crew are attentive and likely to order Koreans in front of you not to recline while you're eating.

Upgrade very unlikely. (without using miles)

The experience is likely to be far better than UA. I fly often in economy on 744- the seats are old but good pitch. Crew are attentive and likely to order Koreans in front of you not to recline while you're eating.

I LOVE when the FA's on Asiana ask the passenger in front of me to move their seat backs forward during meal services! So considerate! :)
I've been upgraded on Asiana a few times as StarGold when Y was booked solid.
As for your choice: Take Asiana!!! Service and food are muchos better than United! Seat pitch in OZ Y is better than UA E-, and about the same as E+ (if not an inch less). I'd choose Asiana over UA any day! ^
Have a great flight!!

This is the first time I hear any one complaining OZ's seat pitch.
I am 6 foot 2 inches tall.



[QUOTE=N227UA;7560984] avoid OZ at all cost. Because, you get a lot less legroom.

As for your choice: Take Asiana!!! Service and food are muchos better than United! Seat pitch in OZ Y is better than UA E-, and about the same as E+ (if not an inch less). I'd choose Asiana over UA any day! ^

OP is a 2P, which means he can get E+, much better than the legroom on the 74M on OZ. Also OP is flying ORD to ICN, it is much wiser to take UA, although it is a one stop flight thru NRT, but currently the two flights ORD-NRT are using 777, which means PTV in every seat vs main screen on OZ.

I would definately choose PTV vs good service on this 13 hours flight.

OP is a 2P, which means he can get E+, much better than the legroom on the 74M on OZ. Also OP is flying ORD to ICN, it is much wiser to take UA, although it is a one stop flight thru NRT, but currently the two flights ORD-NRT are using 777, which means PTV in every seat vs main screen on OZ.

I would definately choose PTV vs good service on this 13 hours flight.


He claims to be 1K. Anyhow, UA is much better choice, no question at all. BTW, who would say that OZ's service in Y is better than that of UA in Y? I find that service in Y is essentially the same on all carriers. There are just too many people to take care in Y, and it's hardly possible to make a distinction. If someone were to say that OZ's Y service is better than UA's Y service, I would laugh out loud.



This is the first time I hear any one complaining OZ's seat pitch.
I am 6 foot 2 inches tall.


Get the fact right. I didn't complain about their Y pitch. I SAID THE OP WILL GET A LOT LESS LEGROOM ON OZ THAN ON UA, GOT IT NOW? I SAID LESS, WHICH MAKES A COMPARISON.

You are implicitly saying that UA's service in Y is not good.


Anyhow, UA is much better choice, no question at all. BTW, who would say that OZ's service in Y is better than that of UA in Y? I find that service in Y is essentially the same on all carriers.

Compare 35-36 inches on UA E-plus vs. 34 on OZ.
And you say " A LOT LESS "?
Do you know OZ's seat width is an inch wider than UA's? :p 19 vs. 18

Even if the OP is sitting in an E+ zone, he has to endure "4 hrs longer" than OZ's non-stop flight.


Get the fact right. I didn't complain about their Y pitch. I SAID THE OP WILL GET A LOT LESS LEGROOM ON OZ THAN ON UA, GOT IT NOW? I SAID LESS, WHICH MAKES A COMPARISON.

I would go with OZ and yes, I do believe the service on OZ is better even in Y than UA. Here's an example:

Being based in the U.S. I have been trained not to press the "call" button. First of all, it's seemingly worthless and it almost seems to be "etiquette" not to do so.

On the other hand, I was surprised the first time I rode OZ in Y. People often pressed the call button and if the FA's were in the galley, you could see them run out to help a passenger.

Compare 35-36 inches on UA E-plus vs. 34 on OZ.
And you say " A LOT LESS "?
Do you know OZ's seat width is an inch wider than UA's? :p 19 vs. 18

Even if the OP is sitting in an E+ zone, he has to endure "4 hrs longer" than OZ's non-stop flight.


If I were you, I would question the credibility of your source before sticking your tongue out. Did you think that it was possible to pack 10 of 19in seats on 74M? If you can think, go to Boeing website and figure it out. Boeing's original cabin cross-section layout of 744 family accommodates 10 of 17.2in seats on a row. If there were to be 10 of 19in seats on row, it will consequently take 18in away. Then each aisle loses 9in. The original aisle width is 19.5in. After all, you get an aisle of 10.5in. Can you walk along 10.5in aisle with your carry-on rolled? This is something to be laughed out loud.:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D



You are implicitly saying that UA's service in Y is not good.


Yes, Y service on any carrier is NOT GOOD. At least that is for me. For you, I don't know, probably you can consider some Y service to be good?



Edited to add: BEWARE THAT THERE'S NO CREDIBLE SOURCE that identifies OZ's seat pitch as 34in. My guess is OZ-ninnies are making things up which can't be true as shown above.

I have never been on this particular fllight, but....

....there is no airline where I got more upgrades than with OZ. You will be treated very nicely and you will not have to endure the rudeness of UA. The flight will be direct allowing you to get there faster.
The old 747s are indeed old and you will get no ISV. But you will get smiles, a friendly service, good food (try the Korean selection) and a much nicer experience than on UA.

From purely Y class seating (not considering mileage accural), I would consider UA primarily because the OP is a UA elite and have access to E+. Also, OP can fly to ICN via SFO or via NRT, both of which he/she can fly on 777 that has PTVs (OZ on this route does not have PTV since it's on their old 747 Combi). If you can get row 17 on 777s with UA, it's hard to beat the comforts of that seating.

Now, if you consider FA service and overall on-board experience, I would choose OZ. OZ FA, based on 30+ international and domestic flights with them, are extremely professional, young, and kind. UA service is a hit or miss. Sometimes you get nice services and sometime you get crappy service. With OZ, you are most likely to have nice consistent service.

If we factor mileage accural, the OP being 1P or higher makes a significant difference since we are talking about the difference of 75% additional bonus mileage. On this long route, 75% difference matters. So, being a UA elite, I would choose UA regardless of seat comfort and service - because in the end, all it will matter is your RDM, EQM, and getting from point A to point B.

If someone were to say that OZ's Y service is better than UA's Y service, I would laugh out loud.

You can laugh out loud alright, N227UA. It seems like you are still significantly biased about your experience with OZ that happened a long time ago. I think there are many many FTers who will say OZ Y service is better than UA Y service. Shall we take a poll in the UA forum?! :D

You can laugh out loud alright, N227UA. It seems like you are still significantly biased about your experience with OZ that happened a long time ago. I think there are many many FTers who will say OZ Y service is better than UA Y service. Shall we take a poll in the UA forum?! :D

Hey Brahms, I thought the same thing as above, but I quit responding to N227UA's posts last year..... His anti-Asiana rants grew repetitive and tedious.......
As for the OP, most would agree that Asiana's service is spectacular (at least compared to UA's), and you will enjoy it. ^ I find the food in Y (even on short-hauls) to be much better than on UA. And even at 6'2", I would choose one inch less in Y (assuming you had access to E+) for Asiana's better service and food. While one might point out that the OZ 747 on that route is older, I find aircraft on OZ to be much cleaner than any of UA's aircraft. Whichever you choose, enjoy your flight! :)

I have flying experiences in recent years

- OZ : ORD - ICN or v.v
- Y (34 inches) : 3
- C: 1 (Op up)

- UA: ORD - NRT - ICN or v.v
- E+(35 inches) : 2
- C: 1 (OP up)

If you travel in Y class and are not interested in PTV,
OZ is better than UA.

Even if you travel in C class of OZ,
Kind service of FA, food and shorter flight time may compensate old C class seat of OZ.

In my case, I usually sleep in flight except meal time. Therefore, I have no interest in PTV. :)

So many people can't be wrong.

So many people can't be wrong.



Again, who says the rating represents the opinion of many people? It seems like that's not what people think here. http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/3358468/ I would say Skytrax rating is a very bogus stuff that is represented by very few employees of Skytrax. Who knows, OZ might have bribed them by putting some cash in their pocket. Anyhow whatever, who cares about some random material made by a bogus brit company? Now, why don't you explain about your source regarding the width of 19in seats installed on OZ's 74M? I guess if there were thousands of people like you, they can be wrong.

Again, who says the rating represents the opinion of many people? It seems like that's not what people think here. http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/3358468/ I would say Skytrax rating is a very bogus stuff that is represented by very few employees of Skytrax. Who knows, OZ might have bribed them by putting some cash in their pocket. Anyhow whatever, who cares about some random material made by a bogus brit company? Now, why don't you explain about your source regarding the width of 19in seats installed on OZ's 74M? I guess if there were thousands of people like you, they can be wrong.

Here we go again...:rolleyes:

If I were you, I would question the credibility of your source before sticking your tongue out.



Well, we all know how credible you are regarding OZ.
I for one really want to trust what you say, but with your constant OZ bashing which keeps repeating itself over and over again, your posting is no longer credible. Quite unfortunate since I tend to rely Flyertalk a lot in making sound decisions.

To the OP: My honest opinion regarding OZ is that its a lot better than UA. I had taken both OZ and UA on the same route. The service on UA is not just slightly worse, it was ONE of the worst transpacific flight I had ever taken. Granted, that could've been due to a bad crew or bad weather etc.... but all three times on UA was quite consistantly bad. OZ on another hand, was consistantly fine, if not good. As for the the seat pitch or other details, I cannot say for sure. Seems like most everyone agree though (including the n227ua) Y class IS Y class - they are pretty much the same all across.

Bottom line:
If I were choose, I would fly OZ but accrude miles on UA.

Bottom line:
If I were choose, I would fly OZ but accrude miles on UA.

If I don't have status with UA, I would choose OZ.

I am a 1P, just like OP, would not want to giveaway my 100% bonus miles, the E+ seat and the PTV, given that it is a long trip.

Well, we all know how credible you are regarding OZ. I for one really want to trust what you say, but with your constant OZ bashing which keeps repeating itself over and over again, your posting is no longer credible. Quite unfortunate since I tend to rely Flyertalk a lot in making sound decisions.

Well said.

If I don't have status with UA, I would choose OZ.

I am a 1P, just like OP, would not want to giveaway my 100% bonus miles, the E+ seat and the PTV, given that it is a long trip.

Likewise, as a 1K, my bennies with UA imbalances the reasons to fly OZ. I will certainly choose OZ for my award flights or flights from Korea to other Asian cities for non-stop flights.

Hey Brahms, I thought the same thing as above, but I quit responding to N227UA's posts last year..... His anti-Asiana rants grew repetitive and tedious.......
As for the OP, most would agree that Asiana's service is spectacular (at least compared to UA's), and you will enjoy it. ^ I find the food in Y (even on short-hauls) to be much better than on UA. And even at 6'2", I would choose one inch less in Y (assuming you had access to E+) for Asiana's better service and food. While one might point out that the OZ 747 on that route is older, I find aircraft on OZ to be much cleaner than any of UA's aircraft. Whichever you choose, enjoy your flight! :)

Thanks, all, for your info. Very helpful in looking at the pros and cons. I will try OZ--sounds like the overall experience will be much nicer.
And for those who wonder, I am flying my way back to 1K after being unable to fly for a few months last year.

I will try OZ--sounds like the overall experience will be much nicer.

I think you'll enjoy it -- I've found the service and food to be better on OZ than UA. Haven't really got out the tape measure to compare seat pitches, but I don't think you'll be cramped. Why not write a trip report? We could do with some objective opionions on the OZ vs. UA product.

If I don't have status with UA, I would choose OZ.

I am a 1P, just like OP, would not want to giveaway my 100% bonus miles, the E+ seat and the PTV, given that it is a long trip.

Don't forget the 70% EQM/RDM on discounted Y fares!

LAX