d'Yquem

I went to Plane Food for lunch on Thursday (as I had many hours to kill and the CR menu wasn't very appealing).

To be blunt, it was more Chez Gerard than Gordon Ramsay.

While the food was edible, but the service was truly awful - fifteen minutes to be sat down even though the restaurant was almost empty; being told I had to sit at the bar even though the restaurant was almost empty; waiting fifteen minutes for a menu which only came when I once again prompted a pimple-faced youth to give me one. The food took another twenty minutes to arrive. I asked for a bottle of mineral water and had to chase three times. Then when I finished it, I was asked if I wanted another, to which I replied no and was still brought one (and charged me for it).

This restaurant must pull its socks up if it isn't to devalue to the Gordon Ramsey brand... but it's still much better than anything offered in any BA lounge (including the pre-flight FIRST dining).

I gave feedback to someone who looked like the restaurant manager who admitted things weren't great and blamed BAA for not allowing his staff to come "unescorted" (whatever that means) and saying things would improve.

I do recommend the apple crumble though!

Regards
/MHL

p.s. They've not started the 'picnic box' service, about which I'm really excited! I can't want not to have to put up with the truly awful CE food any longer!

BahrainLad

I was browsing the Plane Food site and came across this lovely photo of Gordon R reading a midmarket tabloid (Mail, Express, eurgh) http://www.gordonramsay.com/planefoo...nce/index.html

What's quite ironic is that he's paused at a big blue Continental Airlines advertisement.

SpeedbirdLHR

In short, his staff don't have full security clearance and are only on termporary airside passes, so have to be escorted by someone with full clearance. Not BAA's fault, those are the rules and give than ads for Plane Food staff only started appearing this year, they can only blame themselves not BAA. It is well known that security clearance takes several weeks, even months in some cases.

where2travel

It looks like it's The Times.

Lovecraft

Sounds like a case for Kitchen's Nightmares!!

Skimo

Caviar is on the menu, which could make a pretty big dent in the voucher, provided you like it of course. Also order a bottle of Louis Reoderer, if wine is permitted in the T&C's. I'm not even going to ask if you like that particular tipple or not

Trav+

When watching him on KN, I noticed he holds his knife like a pen, so his reading the Express (or the Times) doesn't surprise me.

And the Plane Food logo is just naff as naff can be.

ACfly

I had the opportunity this morning to try breakfast at Plane Food given that there was absolutely nothing decent to eat at the Galleries lounge - I checked out the First and the Club and there was nothing hot being served at 0830hr.

After transiting from T4 from my YYZ flight to T5 to get my connecting flight, there was no opportunity to check out the arrivals lounge.

Anyways, there was no a lot of selections for Breakfast - and only four options: Fitness, Continental, Classic, and American (I may have got them wrong).

I chose the Classic (which is English Breakfast for 16 Pounds): comes with glass of juice, coffee/tea, and the standard sausage, eggs (made to order, tomato, mushrooms, and toast... It was quite tasty.

Service was very good: fast, efficient and someone was always coming to ask if I needed anything.

The restaurant is located on the second floor.

Full Score

Please keep the reviews coming. We shouldn't damn the place on the evidence of a Telegraph review, though the "no naked flames" stipulation and poor service mentioned to date will put a lot of people off.

Does anyone know why the former is being enforced? Ramsay must be tearing his hair out. Why wasn't such an issue foreseen before he signed the lease? What a "Nightmare".

convair

I checked out the menu ...

http://www.gordonramsay.com/planefood/menus/alacarte/

Meal for two with starters puds and sides, a good red wine and water, one portion caviar (my partner doesn't like the stuff), plus service charge, £170. That's the best use I can see of my 200 quid voucher unless I deliberately choose more expensive stuff that i don't like (such as the fizz...).

If I wasn't trying to to burn the BA voucher I reckon I'd escape with a very decent meal for two, with wine, for less than 100 quid incl. srvc (just omitting the caviar and desserts, and trading down on the wine choice). Am I alone in thinking that is cheap for London, let alone for a landmark destination?

Raffles

Yup! Relatively impossible to spend less than £80 on a meal for two in any London restaurant with tablecloths, even if you only have half a bottle of wine. If you're going for a full bottle most London restaurants will be something like this:

£7 starter + £16 main + £7 dessert + £3 coffee + £8 pp wine + 12.5% service = £51.25 each

Chuck on an extra £1.50 each if you have a bottle of water between you

ACfly

What I find a particularly interesting development is that the restaurant automatically puts a 18% Service charge on the bill.

PDW5000

Although I'm sure it was BAA not BA that was dealing with T5 vendors, that's still priceless.

The question is whether displaying that ad was a conscious decision.

d'Yquem

I was lucky enough to be taken to Pétrus for dinner last night. It was world class by every conceivable measurement, which made me think...

...Plane Food is seriously devaluing the Gordon Ramsay brand.

TravellerFrequently

Just think about the bad language at that comment!

Perhaps he needs someone to go along and give him some advice how to run a good restaurant