Originally Posted by
orbitmic
If, as I believe, the KL flight from AMS to SIN is operated by a 772 (9 seats abreas) as opposed AF's 77W (10 seats abreast), I would, on that flight, it would take me less time to choose the KLM option than for Usain Bolt to run 100 metres. The Air France and KLM 77W configuration is a disgrace, a crime against full service flying, and a truly punitive experience. The Air France long haul Y product is generally fine, but if it involves a 77W, I'd frankly choose any alternative because it really makes me feel claustrophobic and I'm a tiny 60kg for 1m75 person. AF and KL's 77Ws are to long haul flying what Ryanair is to short haul flying, except that in the AF/KL case, it is not the service which is sacrificed but the seat comfort.
Apparently it depends on the day of the week.
[KVS Availability Tool 5.1.7/Diamond - Amadeus: Timetable/NL-BCDF]
Code:
AMS Amsterdam-Schiphol NL [EHAM]
SIN Singapore Changi SG [WSSS]
THU 07 Jan 2010 - 14 Jan 2010
Carrier Flight From Depart To Arrive A/C St Frequency | Dur'n | Dep T | Arr T | Effect | Ending | Exceptions
--------- ------ ---- -------- ---- -------- --- -- ----------------------------------------------------------------
KL 835 AMS 21:00 SIN 16:15 +1 77W 0 -2--5-7 12:15 - 1 06 Dec 26 Mar
KL 837 AMS 21:00 SIN 16:15 +1 772 0 1-34-6- 12:15 - 1 07 Jan 20 Jan
I concurr with orbitmic : avoid 77W at all costs, on AF and KL, as the 10 abreast config is a disgrace.