FirstClassGuy

Will be traveling to Germany and have my choice of either KLM business or AF business on an award ticket from LAX. Which business product is better? I have never flown either airline. thanks

Goldorak

The hard product (seats) is very similar. IFE : great on KL, greatly improved on AF also, so somewhat equivalent IMO. Food : better on AF, but KL is not bad. F/A : good and bad crews on both airlines.
As a whole, I have a preference for AF but I take KL without problem too

FirstClassGuy

thanks. Since I have never flown either i think I will split it up and fly AF over and KLM back. that way I can experience both since they are similar.

kevinflyaway

From my experience hardwarde wise you're better of with AF. Mostly new aircrafts and KL still operates the 747 on the AMS-LAX flight.

Meals I think are the same in C, but service is much better at KL. Mostly more friendly and attentive. I've flown AF now for 6 times and everytime I think, my god I miss the KLM touch from the FA's....

So good luck and I'm curious what your findings are

tezzer

I personally prefer KL metal, service and Schiphol to AF and CDG. Nothing definitive, just a more comfortable experience, and only live 20 minutes from a KL airport in the UK, as opposed to 2 hours from the nearest AF point of departure / arrivel.

bodory

With KL you will transit in AMS, which is much easier than in CDG.

Teessider

last week I flew in C from AMS-SFO on KL (777) and SFO-CDG on AF (747). I much preferred the KL flight and agree that transit in AMS is more pleasant. A major downside for me was that the IFE on the AF flight was dreadful - small seatback screen with 10 channels each of video (mainly French/subtitles) and audio, all on rolling loop, ie no personal control. May just have been an older aircraft, of course

alanw

Even the AF aircraft with the newer IFE system suffer from the same poor selection of content. KL is vastly, vastly better in that respect.

If you're on the 777 on either carrier, you run the risk of being trapped in a middle seat so choose early and hope they don't move you at the last minute.

On KL you also have the 744 as an option, which although older is also a much more comfortable way to pass 11 hours. Row 77 on the upper deck has about 2 meters of pitch. Row 1 and 2 are also great.

All else being equal, though, I would take KL every time just to get the transit and immigration process at Schiphol and not CDG. While it has improved some, it's still a mess where AMS is a genuinely pleasant transit point (and the lounges are better).

brunos

Seats on KL 747 are very old generation (very few airlines still have that kind of seats), very uncomfortable for sleeping IMO, good for seating. Alanw seems to have spotted some seats that are more fun.
IFE on AF is a small screen with rather limited film selection (you do get 80 but very few recent hits, probably too expensive).
Meals have improved on AF and are excellent for C, wines mediocre. Transitting in CDG can be a big pain.

JC25

I would choose KLM upperdeck on 747. Seats are so so, (may be not so good than AFs 777 , - both don't provide real flat beds) but I really feel more comfortable with them than at AFs planes. And you will also get some gift (old amsterdam porcelan made houses, filled up with some alcool - I never taste, but the houses look cute

tjobbe

If KL or AF its a matter of taste rather.

I personally prefer KL due to on average more friendly FA's and you can connect to more german cities from AMS. As well AMS is the better Airport to take the commuter hop to Germany.

One thing you should be aware of: some connections out of AMS to Germany are still with the famous Fokker's but my wife likes them... the purity of flying.

Cheers, Tjobbe

GetSetJetSet

Both are lousy uncomfortable angled lie flat seats.

kevinsac

Since you can't get AF First (in your other thread), I would go with KL. Better service (not French F/As!) and AMS is a nicer to transit than CDG, especially going to Germany. Once you have decided which flights to book, be sure to check out seatguru .... you could get stuck in the angled seats, which LH offers, and you always said you never wanted to fly on an incline!

Are you doing the "Heidi tour?" Be sure to show everyone the old family home in Fuessen!

JOUY31

Looks like the best option, and you will be able to judge by yourself .

bbelovic

So, a related question - we have an upcoming itinerary ORD-CDG, KL connecting thru AMS on the outbound, AF non-stop on the return. Funny story, it was supposed to be non-stop both ways on AF, but AF cancelled the flight on the exact date we're flying - which is very interesting, given the itinerary is way out there, in November. The only reason I even knew about it is that I randomly decided to check AF itinerary and noticed I had a flight on the wrong outbound date (they just silently rebooked us for the following day).

But I digress - the question is/are this: two of us are flying (myself and Mrs), and looking for seat suggestions on both flights. I am tall (6'4") so I'm hoping for specific experiences - comments on seatguru tend to be relative when it comes to legroom.

Does row 1 on KL 747 really have extra legroom, or will I have a problem with bulkhead? Seems like row 77 would provide the extra room I hope for, but I'd like to check out the row 1 or maybe row 2 for the curvature - seems to be reserved for F on lot of airlines.

Similar question for AF 332, but I guess less important as this will be daytime flight...

Thanks!