A320neo - Really Poor Hard Product
Jul 22, 19, 2:13 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2018
Programs: $9 Fare Club
Posts: 1,343
A320neo - Really Poor Hard Product
Can't seem to find a megathread dealing with the new A320neos so here goes;
Did LHR to FCO the other day in 15A, the configuration is similar to a US ULCC such as Spirit/Frontier, really tiny pitch (seatguru claims 30" but it definitely felt smaller) and they're using those slim line seats that a pretty uncomfortable.
First time flying BA in a while and its staggering to see how poor the product is these days.
Did LHR to FCO the other day in 15A, the configuration is similar to a US ULCC such as Spirit/Frontier, really tiny pitch (seatguru claims 30" but it definitely felt smaller) and they're using those slim line seats that a pretty uncomfortable.
First time flying BA in a while and its staggering to see how poor the product is these days.
Jul 22, 19, 2:14 am
#2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Programs: BA, VS, HH, IHG, MB, MR
Posts: 26,781
You (in general) asked for ultra low fares above everything else, this is what you get back .....
i admit the economic logic seems to fail here. I can travel to the airport in anything from a bus to a chauffeur driven limo. When I arrive I can stay anywhere from a hostel to 5-star luxury. So why has the market failed on the middle bit?
Or have the airlines failed, in failing to provide a premium product people want to pay for? Let's assume BA has 10% of capacity from the London area to the Rome area. In any other business sector, you could cream off 10% of the market with a premium product for those who want to pay more. But not here, it seems.
i admit the economic logic seems to fail here. I can travel to the airport in anything from a bus to a chauffeur driven limo. When I arrive I can stay anywhere from a hostel to 5-star luxury. So why has the market failed on the middle bit?
Or have the airlines failed, in failing to provide a premium product people want to pay for? Let's assume BA has 10% of capacity from the London area to the Rome area. In any other business sector, you could cream off 10% of the market with a premium product for those who want to pay more. But not here, it seems.
Jul 22, 19, 2:28 am
#3
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2018
Programs: $9 Fare Club
Posts: 1,343
You (in general) asked for ultra low fares above everything else, this is what you get back .....
i admit the economic logic seems to fail here. I can travel to the airport in anything from a bus to a chauffeur driven limo. When I arrive I can stay anywhere from a hostel to 5-star luxury. So why has the market failed on the middle bit?
Or have the airlines failed, in failing to provide a premium product people want to pay for? Let's assume BA has 10% of capacity from the London area to the Rome area. In any other business sector, you could cream off 10% of the market with a premium product for those who want to pay more. But not here, it seems.
i admit the economic logic seems to fail here. I can travel to the airport in anything from a bus to a chauffeur driven limo. When I arrive I can stay anywhere from a hostel to 5-star luxury. So why has the market failed on the middle bit?
Or have the airlines failed, in failing to provide a premium product people want to pay for? Let's assume BA has 10% of capacity from the London area to the Rome area. In any other business sector, you could cream off 10% of the market with a premium product for those who want to pay more. But not here, it seems.
I do agree that there surely has to be a market for a better J product than what airlines in Europe are delivering right now. It'll be interesting to see how EI do with their new A321LR J class to Europe (outside of onward connections - strictly in an O&D sense).
Jul 22, 19, 2:34 am
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist, Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere between 0 and 13,000 metres high
Programs: AF/KL Life Plat, BA GfL+CCR, Aclub Plat, Hilton Diam, Marriott Gold, blablablah, etc
Posts: 29,797
How about this one? NEOs and a couple of SH changes
Jul 22, 19, 2:35 am
#5
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Vale of Glamorgan
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 2,843
Having just returned from a lengthy trip to the US, I am firmly of the opinion that Club Europe is better than AA domestic first. AA scores on seat, BA on everything else - quality and presentation of food, professionalism of crew, cabin ambience, service, value for money.
Jul 22, 19, 3:17 am
#6
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: London
Programs: BAEC Gold, Marriott LT Platinum
Posts: 2,094
Based on my recent travel experience, if you travel in Europe in Y, nothing will beat the FR/ U2 bulkhead seat (of course you 'waste' 5 tier points if flying on the cheapest BA ticket).
Jul 22, 19, 3:21 am
#7
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: London
Programs: BAEC Gold, Marriott LT Platinum
Posts: 2,094
Having just returned from a lengthy trip to the US, I am firmly of the opinion that Club Europe is better than AA domestic first. AA scores on seat, BA on everything else - quality and presentation of food, professionalism of crew, cabin ambience, service, value for money.
Whilst I really like the large AA seat on an E190 or 737 in F, the service was many times kind of 'I do what is necessary', but I guess that won't be a surprise here on the forum. I still like to say that I don't find AA as bad as others say; BA can be easily on the same level (e.g. sitting in an 787 Y seat and crew busy with reading Hello magazines in the galley).
Jul 22, 19, 3:35 am
#8
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ipswich
Posts: 7,543
I don't find the AA service as poor as reported here either, but on most short trips I don't really need much/any service. I value the seat/space above everything else put together so AA domestic first still beats CE for me.
Jul 22, 19, 3:46 am
#10
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Provincie Antwerpen, Vlaanderen, Belgi
Programs: MUCCI Gold
Posts: 2,511
Personally I don't think there's anything to differentiate BA Y class on European Routes from an FR or EZ from what I can see. The fares aren't exactly ultra low on BA either. I just associated a more comfortable travel experience with the legacies (BA, LH etc) than I got on that A320neo.
Much as we'd like it to be that way, if there was a market there the airlines would presumably be serving it. I'm not in the LCC market AT ALL - haven't taken a ryanair flight in 20 years and I'm not changing that under any circumstances. As much as I'd like a "nicer" way to travel that I would be prepared to pay for - I have to accept that it's unlikely to happen. I just form my travel plans accordingly, and from continental Europe airlines aren't the only option.
Jul 22, 19, 5:16 am
#11
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 1,019
Just to expand on that the Pinnacles are in Rows 1-12 on the A320neo and Rows 1-14 on the A321neo. These obviously allow for Economy pax to use when the CE cabin isnt at the maximum.
Jul 22, 19, 5:53 am
#12
Join Date: Jun 2008
Programs: TK*G (E+), IHG Plat Ambassador
Posts: 7,840
Having just returned from a lengthy trip to the US, I am firmly of the opinion that Club Europe is better than AA domestic first. AA scores on seat, BA on everything else - quality and presentation of food, professionalism of crew, cabin ambience, service, value for money.
- AA F/A's can be as bad as BA F/A's and as good BA F/A's. I would not generalize - you can have terrible experience with both airlines
- CE hard product is pathetic (yes - I know row 1 is better...)
- AA food can be bad, but BA food is not much better
- What I hate about BA is the Galley FM. On longer flights, I can hear all the gossips seating in row 1 - AA F/A's are better here.. (but when they gossip they do this as loudly as BA F/A's)
But it is not that relevant - unless something major happens there will never be BA flights on US domestic itineraries or AA intra-European flights...
Jul 22, 19, 5:54 am
#13
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 6,926
I recently bagged row 25 on the NEO on a KBP-LHR flight at the end of a long two days of flying that included:
1) China Southern KHG-URC (737-800)
2) Air Astana URC-TSE-ALA (A321)
3) Ukraine international ALA-KBP.
Of them all, believe it or not my favourite seat was the non-recliner on BA. Im 185cm tall and I fit fairly well. The fact that there was no recline was also great, because in EVERY flight prior people just reclined as soon as they boarded and stayed that way. On a 6-hr flight as it was on the Ukraine intl leg, it really felt.
I also liked the power ports, though a simpler USB door would also have been welcome.
Where I think the others were better was on the wi-fi (both CZ and Air Astana allowed flyers to stream films for free and, although the selection was on the short side especially on CZ, it was welcome) and the loos. BAs spaceflex interiors are diabolical, Cruz should spend an hour on those to feel what theyre like.
I know Im in minority but the decision of not having recliners is a great one on my books. As for the padding (or lack thereof), again I think its a question of taste. The TSE-ALA leg on Air astana was subbed to an old A321 that had very old, thickly padded seats. Legroom was very much sacrificed and those seats reclined way too deep. They were really uncomfortable, at least for me.
1) China Southern KHG-URC (737-800)
2) Air Astana URC-TSE-ALA (A321)
3) Ukraine international ALA-KBP.
Of them all, believe it or not my favourite seat was the non-recliner on BA. Im 185cm tall and I fit fairly well. The fact that there was no recline was also great, because in EVERY flight prior people just reclined as soon as they boarded and stayed that way. On a 6-hr flight as it was on the Ukraine intl leg, it really felt.
I also liked the power ports, though a simpler USB door would also have been welcome.
Where I think the others were better was on the wi-fi (both CZ and Air Astana allowed flyers to stream films for free and, although the selection was on the short side especially on CZ, it was welcome) and the loos. BAs spaceflex interiors are diabolical, Cruz should spend an hour on those to feel what theyre like.
I know Im in minority but the decision of not having recliners is a great one on my books. As for the padding (or lack thereof), again I think its a question of taste. The TSE-ALA leg on Air astana was subbed to an old A321 that had very old, thickly padded seats. Legroom was very much sacrificed and those seats reclined way too deep. They were really uncomfortable, at least for me.
Jul 22, 19, 6:02 am
#14
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 1,019
Having just returned from a lengthy trip to the US, I am firmly of the opinion that Club Europe is better than AA domestic first. AA scores on seat, BA on everything else - quality and presentation of food, professionalism of crew, cabin ambience, service, value for money.
View from the dAArk side
- AA F/A's can be as bad as BA F/A's and as good BA F/A's. I would not generalize - you can have terrible experience with both airlines
- CE hard product is pathetic (yes - I know row 1 is better...)
- AA food can be bad, but BA food is not much better
- What I hate about BA is the Galley FM. On longer flights, I can hear all the gossips seating in row 1 - AA F/A's are better here.. (but when they gossip they do this as loudly as BA F/A's)
But it is not that relevant - unless something major happens there will never be BA flights on US domestic itineraries or AA intra-European flights...
- AA F/A's can be as bad as BA F/A's and as good BA F/A's. I would not generalize - you can have terrible experience with both airlines
- CE hard product is pathetic (yes - I know row 1 is better...)
- AA food can be bad, but BA food is not much better
- What I hate about BA is the Galley FM. On longer flights, I can hear all the gossips seating in row 1 - AA F/A's are better here.. (but when they gossip they do this as loudly as BA F/A's)
But it is not that relevant - unless something major happens there will never be BA flights on US domestic itineraries or AA intra-European flights...
My crews on AA have been consistently worse than BA (although granted you can have a bad one with BA).
Also BA food is not much better I strongly disagree with. I get a full English breakfast (like below) on a sub-30 minute LHR-MAN flight. By far superior to the AA offering. And then on the Band 3+ routes such as 1hr 45min to Madrid I get a proper meal that is often very very good. Ill give you some of the long Band 2 routes can be not so good but in my opinion still far superior to AA all around, almost always in both quantity and quality.
Jul 22, 19, 8:13 am
#15
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Flatland
Programs: AA Lifetime Gold 1MM, BA Gold, UA Peon
Posts: 6,027
The poor experiences people have with the AA domestic "first" product (rather than the delivery, i.e. the staff) are often around the meals, or lack of, on medium length journeys outside "mealtime". Think mid-afternoon or evening Band 2 or even 3 without any meal, only a snackbar or similar. All the booze you might want in generous measures (I swear some of the AA G&T are half-and-half!), but no food. Yet, you're travelling and may not have had a chance to eat on the formal schedule.
Of course the seat's nice, and on a longer flight with a meal and a nice crew the AA experience is lovely; rather like BA with the addition of a good seat. But those medium flights, especially off-mealtime, are poor. I don't need a bigger seat if you're not going to feed me
Of course the seat's nice, and on a longer flight with a meal and a nice crew the AA experience is lovely; rather like BA with the addition of a good seat. But those medium flights, especially off-mealtime, are poor. I don't need a bigger seat if you're not going to feed me
Last edited by flatlander; Jul 22, 19 at 8:21 am Reason: emoti-typography
