Originally Posted by robb
I have to disagree with those who say go via Europe. From SFO, it's 9500 miles to go SFO-BKK-BLR, or 10500 miles to go SFO-FRA-BLR. It's 1000 fewer miles to go transpac.
Now, I also prefer transpac because I'm a UA flyer. I can upgrade all the way to BKK and a C ticket on TG isn't that much extra.
robb - i am curious why you think going west makes more sense than going east. last couple of trips to BLR, we had small kid with us and it made sense to break at FRA. The SFO-FRA leg is 10.5 hrs and ideal time to get some sleep. A half day break at FRA allowed us to stretch our legs etc. FRA-BLR is another 9 hrs or so. We found that convenient.
Going west, we have found SFO-HKG the longest leg and at the limits. I'd rather fly SFO-NRT-BKK being a UA flyer myself. That allows us to break our journey into more manageable legs. It also gives me E+ till BKK at least.
The distance is definitely less if you do SFO-(NRT)-BKK-BLR. but the layover of 19 hrs at BKK does eat up quite a bit of time. Don't you think so? unless you like to decompress and get some sleep at BKK.