brp

Surely you meant "seamless". Or perhaps, unseemly? Inasmuch as some of us use the AAdvantage miles for other purposes and enjoy the perks of status, yeah, it is worth it for some. I've not found any of the things you mention to be a problem. FCC has been very, very easy. LHR-LAX with a short hop to SJC is nice as well. Who flies LON-SJC with no stops? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

Definitely YMMV, all cheer leading aside.

Cheers.

gemac

OK. We now have stewlevine and krug who think that you can get an award ticket using AA miles on a BA flight LHR-DFW, and we have Blumie and yours truly who think we can't.

Since correct information on the AA forum now seems to be a voting process, and we are tied, does anyone else want to vote?

gemac

LRH-MEX-DFW is not LHR-DFW, and doesn't do much to solve stewlevine's complaint that it takes him 3 flights to get to DFW from much of continental Europe. You could have just as easily posted (BA)LHR-CDG-(AA)-DFW, which also doesn't solve the problem under discussion.

jragosta

I vote for "who cares" since why would anyone in their right mind want to fly into Heathrow?

Blumie

Because, like the complaints about MIA, the complaints about LHR are wildly overblown. Yes, like MIA, the place sucks in a lot of ways, but, like MIA, it's not the hellhole everyone makes it out to be. I personally don't mind flying into LHR and typically will do so on paid J tickets since I can use my VIPs to upgrade to F. The ability to fly F for me outweights the (relatively minor, IMHO) inconveniences of LHR. YMMV.

andrzej

Sorry, but with all due respect, I have to disagree. LHR sucks the big one. I for one will try to avoid, whatever it takes.....

I'll take MIA anytime over the hellhole called LHR!

bernardd

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I don't think AA has any other flights to LGW.

krug

Well, things have been better at LHR, that's for sure.

Some people, especially those less savvy than most FTers, perhaps those who do not "get" the new hand baggage restrictions, and those without FastPass access through the FCC have had considerable delays recently. This is unacceptable.

But BAA is hiring more security people, and they have instituted improved procedures recently (viz the shoes only scanners at LGW whcih work quite well to speed up the lines, though wholly useless at preventing potential terrorists). Plus people get more savvy generally and know what to do to minimise delays in security.

As a resident, I don't use FCC, and having registered for IRIS, using FastTrack and having well marked priority baggage I have *(touch wood) had very good experiences clearing security in the twelve international trips I have taken so far this year, both outbound and inbound. Never more than 10 minute wait, apart from one Friday pm wait of 15 mins until the Fast Track opened.

However, the key point is that this service will commence in March 2008, exactly when the new www.ba.com/terminal5 opens - so to those who so "I won't connect through LHR" really are missing the point - it will be a whole brand new and rather swanky terminal which will mean you aren't really connecting at all, just changing planes from one gate to another, no worse than a domestic connection on AA, and a "Galleries" lounge complex which will apparently rival The Wing.

This is a sea change from what is currently offered, and unfortunately as AA will stay at Terminal 3 this is not an experience AA will be able to offer transatlantically, unless you are transiting onwards to the Iberian Peninsula or the South of France, which will still operate from T3.

brp

Well, that's certainly your experience, but not mine. LHR has been a dream airport for me. Very quick connections, minimal lines, nice lounges (CX and BA). Not had a problem there (except one small, easily-solved luggage issue). I find ORD far more annoying, for example. The additional APD for using VIPs is truly annoying, but that's not the fault of LHR or BAA. Overall, I quite like LHR as it's been very painless. Reading the countless threads on this here shows that this is a huge YMMV situation.

Cheers.

Blumie

You just can't resist the urge to include your incessant BA cheerleading and AA bashing on this board, can you? And are you certain that those arriving T5 from the US will not have to reclear security even if they have a connection departing from T5? Only then would it be like a domestic connection on AA.

spanishflea

The overlooked plus point for this is rather obvious however.

With BA (almost) all in one terminal, and with all the remaining terminals reorganised based on alliance lines, the number of people having to change terminals via the FCC route will fall dramatically.

It isn't just BA who will benefit from T5, it will be anyone changing planes by any combination of means. Queues to connect and transfer will hopefully become a thing of the past for all, not just those doing BA to BA shuffles.

Blumie

That's a very interesting point that I had not considered. I imagine, though, that there will still be many travelers connecting from other carriers onto BA (I, for one, will continue to fly AA from the US to LHR and BA onward, allowing me to experience the "swanky" new terminal and the "Galleries" lounge), but hopefully your expectation will hold true and T3-T5 connections will be relatively painless.

spanishflea

Seeing as how T3-T5 connection facilities will be through an entirely new facility, and designed to incorporate regular intra-OW connections, I would seriously hope so!

krug

According to the T5 website, the "entirely new facility" will be...wait for it....a bus (though it will be a low emission bus ^)

dayone

Based on post quality and accuracy of information, the only vote that can be made is Blumie and gemac. It's like voting between the news and cartoons.