BA 9 LHR-BKK. Is it getting worse ?
Feb 1, 2019, 8:47 am
#16
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, United Kingdom
Programs: British Airways Gold
Posts: 2,636
The route doesn't have it's own dedicated crew, so surely all the service criticisms are of BA generally?
It's become this self perpetuating dogma on FT that the Bangkok route is so terrible. In reality the planes that fly the route also fly to other places, the crew on the route also fly to other places etc etc
Yes the sub-fleet used for Bangkok (and others) are older and in particular the IFE, but the overall experience in any cabin other than WTP is not really that different than any other BA flight. It amazes me the default advice is to waste time routing via HKG or KUL just for a marginally better experience. If you're that sensitive to the experience then don't fly BA, there are dozens to choose from to Bangkok.
It's become this self perpetuating dogma on FT that the Bangkok route is so terrible. In reality the planes that fly the route also fly to other places, the crew on the route also fly to other places etc etc
Yes the sub-fleet used for Bangkok (and others) are older and in particular the IFE, but the overall experience in any cabin other than WTP is not really that different than any other BA flight. It amazes me the default advice is to waste time routing via HKG or KUL just for a marginally better experience. If you're that sensitive to the experience then don't fly BA, there are dozens to choose from to Bangkok.
Feb 1, 2019, 8:58 am
#17
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Newcastle/London & Worldwide
Programs: BAEC Gold, Virgin Flying Club Silver
Posts: 818
The route doesn't have it's own dedicated crew, so surely all the service criticisms are of BA generally?
It's become this self perpetuating dogma on FT that the Bangkok route is so terrible. In reality the planes that fly the route also fly to other places, the crew on the route also fly to other places etc etc
Yes the sub-fleet used for Bangkok (and others) are older and in particular the IFE, but the overall experience in any cabin other than WTP is not really that different than any other BA flight. It amazes me the default advice is to waste time routing via HKG or KUL just for a marginally better experience. If you're that sensitive to the experience then don't fly BA, there are dozens to choose from to Bangkok.
It's become this self perpetuating dogma on FT that the Bangkok route is so terrible. In reality the planes that fly the route also fly to other places, the crew on the route also fly to other places etc etc
Yes the sub-fleet used for Bangkok (and others) are older and in particular the IFE, but the overall experience in any cabin other than WTP is not really that different than any other BA flight. It amazes me the default advice is to waste time routing via HKG or KUL just for a marginally better experience. If you're that sensitive to the experience then don't fly BA, there are dozens to choose from to Bangkok.
The issue with this route is the timing !!!
Feb 1, 2019, 9:20 am
#18
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Munich, Algarve, Sussex or S.F Bay Area
Programs: Mucci, BA Gold, A3*Gold, AA Plat, HH Gold, IHG Plat Amb, Marriott Plat
Posts: 4,163
The rant sounds like my last MCO-LGW sector. That was on a clapped out 777-200 too and I vowed never again. I have a flight to BKK in a few weeks and for that reason I booked it via SIN on the 380 and onwards 2 days later on CX.
I know I am getting into dangerous territory here, but I also have a problem with some of the newer crew, who despite being very friendly often speak a level of English sometimes not easily understood by some of us more "mature" types. Vocabulary and pronunciation changes with time, but I do still believe that there should be minimum standards. I feel these are often no longer met and it does not fit in with BA's projected and advertised image of a premium cabin.
I know I am getting into dangerous territory here, but I also have a problem with some of the newer crew, who despite being very friendly often speak a level of English sometimes not easily understood by some of us more "mature" types. Vocabulary and pronunciation changes with time, but I do still believe that there should be minimum standards. I feel these are often no longer met and it does not fit in with BA's projected and advertised image of a premium cabin.
Feb 1, 2019, 9:31 am
#19
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 373
I'm not sure why BA doesn't have a 787 on this route if it comes down to being a leisure route and therefore less important financially. Given the flight time, at least give passengers the latest IFE system. With BA clearly not meeting an important number of passengers' expectations on this long flight, why are people not choosing alternative carriers? I use BA a lot, but would not fly with them to BKK. 12hr flights on old 777s, including a daylight return, is not how I want to travel.
Feb 1, 2019, 9:32 am
#20
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 189
Noted about the trolley, i have not flown BA long haul for quite a while due to other airlines offering better connections from Indonesia.
I think the Premium Language would be a decent idea, the CW cabin i would say 65% of the passengers where over 60 and had no idea what HOT meant.
I think the Premium Language would be a decent idea, the CW cabin i would say 65% of the passengers where over 60 and had no idea what HOT meant.
Feb 1, 2019, 9:34 am
#21
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: AMS / DUS / DXB
Programs: BAEC Silver | Flying Blue Gold | Accor Gold
Posts: 107
Feb 1, 2019, 9:50 am
#22
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Munich, Algarve, Sussex or S.F Bay Area
Programs: Mucci, BA Gold, A3*Gold, AA Plat, HH Gold, IHG Plat Amb, Marriott Plat
Posts: 4,163
Feb 1, 2019, 9:57 am
#23
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London
Programs: Hilton, IHG - BA, GA, LH, QR, SV, TK
Posts: 17,008
Ba 9 lhr bkk
Just a general suggestion: adding the route to the flight number is a brilliant idea: it's certain to attract more interest, and makes searches far easier.
Few of us have the OP's depth of history flying BA's network to have memorised the flight numbers which populate schedules.
Making the "headline" illustrative and informative is a service to fellow FTers. It doesn't reduce the poster's credibility as a frequent flyer in any way at all.
Few of us have the OP's depth of history flying BA's network to have memorised the flight numbers which populate schedules.
Making the "headline" illustrative and informative is a service to fellow FTers. It doesn't reduce the poster's credibility as a frequent flyer in any way at all.
Feb 1, 2019, 10:01 am
#24
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 38,644
I doubt that one needs to have a sophisticated grounding in revenue management to work out the answer to that question.
Feb 1, 2019, 10:12 am
#25
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: JAX
Programs: Ex-BA/AA/CP/LY staff, BA Executive Club Blue, IHG Diamond, Marriott Silver, Chick-fil-A Red
Posts: 3,586
Feb 1, 2019, 10:20 am
#26
Join Date: Sep 2013
Programs: BAEC Gold, EK Skywards (enhanced Blue !), Oman Air Sindbad Gold
Posts: 6,399
One might be tempted to think that, with Bangkok and London occupying the top two spots in the world’s most visited cities, BA would want to showcase a much better standard of product and service than the rather underwhelming experiences reported here.
But then I imagine also that it’s not a route frequented by many of their large corporates, and hence the apparent apathy.
But then I imagine also that it’s not a route frequented by many of their large corporates, and hence the apparent apathy.
Feb 1, 2019, 10:28 am
#28
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,596
Surely it is known by BA that the BA09 flight is poor? It seems it's only good value if you are starting ex-AMS. It's an old plane, about the worst quality AVOD/IFE that BA has on any long haul flight. Then there is the numerous reports of mixed fleet performance.
I know it's largely a leisure destination but because improvements have not been made over in recent years there is a stigma attached to this route. Many of the more savvy travellers would fly Qatar or Cathy or even MH and change rather than take the BA direct flight. After years of flying this route both in Club and Economy I doubt I'd ever consider it again and would hunt for better value flights with Qatar or Cathy or even MH.
If I decide I need the Tier Points or Avios or the BA metal flights for renewing BAEC status I'd just fly to KUL or HKG or SIN and transfer from there up to BKK.
I know it's largely a leisure destination but because improvements have not been made over in recent years there is a stigma attached to this route. Many of the more savvy travellers would fly Qatar or Cathy or even MH and change rather than take the BA direct flight. After years of flying this route both in Club and Economy I doubt I'd ever consider it again and would hunt for better value flights with Qatar or Cathy or even MH.
If I decide I need the Tier Points or Avios or the BA metal flights for renewing BAEC status I'd just fly to KUL or HKG or SIN and transfer from there up to BKK.
Feb 1, 2019, 10:37 am
#29
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 5,380
HOT is referring to the hot, or heated part of the meal. Service guidelines talk about hot and cold elements, which presumably gets shortened in galley speak to HOT, and the crew member forgot to switch from speaking slang to other crew to speaking HM English when speaking to PAX, I mean passengers…
Feb 1, 2019, 10:41 am
#30
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: GLA
Programs: BA Silver
Posts: 2,962
wouldn't it be easier and more clear to say " Hot Breakfast or English Breakfast"
They intended to say
wouldn’t it be easier and more clear to say “ Hot Breakast”, or “English Breakfast”