<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by AshleyF:
Have used it. Like the new VOD. Hate the bed. Ergonomic Z shape - my sainted aunt-. I spent most of my time pulling myself back up to sleep.
For an overnight I would go with the BA flat beds and forgo CX service and food.
I notice that BA is rubbing in the 'fully flat' difference with those huge ads at the HK Airport Express.</font>
I wondered how well those business beds on CX worked ... they are a clever design but it looks like a 15 degree slope when flat.
I joked with the CX crew that I'll stop flying F now that there are beds in J, and they said after I try it once I'll be back in F. I have yet to try it (probably never will).
I flew CX and QF (in F) on adjacent days last week, making for a direct comparison. QF is a fine airline, with many good points, but the CX infrastructure is a bit better (galley design, china, seat and cabin equipment) and the wines are 500% better on CX (thanks to some well chosen Australian wines, better/more expensive choices than QF's all-Australian list). QF does have a killer steak sandwich though (snack on demand), a must-try item in my book. Otherwise the CX food is significantly better quality (in fact I flew SQ the same week, and CX was better food than SQ).
The Qantas Club in Sydney is almost as good as The Wing, thanks to excellent food including the best shrimp I've had in years (and this includes the great shrimp in HKG).
The Wing serves Lanson champagne (a good champagne, but a big step down from Krug).
I get the impression that CX is very interested in the Australian market, even if it means competing more with QF and less with SQ. Maybe the yields are better there.