mach92

I just wanted to give my thoughts from this past week on CX and BA F. I flew the long way to JFK via HKG and LHR from CGK.

Lounges: The Concorde lounges at both LHR/JFK were good. Very relaxing with plenty of seats. HKG the Wing is under construction. I used the business lounge with F side. Winner BA

Check in: Checking in at HKG is nothing special for F. There is no F immigration line or fast track. LHR has a fast track lane which was fast. Winner BA

Seat: Cathay only has 9 F seats on the 747 compared to 14 seats for BA. No question the CX seat is one of the best in the world. BA's new F seats were cramped with no space for anything. Winner CX

Food/Wine: I think both did a nice job with the food. Wines were excellent but CX has added some special wines in the last month. Winner equal

Overall I would say Cathay's F seat just makes the long haul so nice. BA should have kept F to 9 or 10 seats. I know they wanted to maximize revenue but it's just to small. I would not pay for F again on BA.

On the ground Cathay really need's to step up the game @ HKG. Hopefully when the Wing open in late 2012 they will have a fast track immigration line direct into the lounge. When paying full fare F it's to be expected in my opinion. Singapore has this at Changi and Thai in Bangkok.

Unterwegs

If I have a choice i pick CX over BA mainly because of the seat. The BA seat is too narrow and feels cramped. I personally prefer the SQ business class seat over BA F.
I wish CX would improve the ground experience for F passengers and would also improve the lounges outside of HKG. They are falling behind in that area.

Conkers

You didn't mention the flight attendants - CX usually much more friendly and attentive IMHO.

Dr. HFH

While you are correct about immigration and fast track, I think that the CX F check in area at HKG is quite nice, individual check in desks, someone comes to retrieve your bags instead of dumping them on a belt.

mdevans

I've found that on average the LHR fast track is slower than HKG general security so I dont see the need for a HKG dedicated fast track channel.

If they did put one in, there are so many diamond card holders it would probably end up busier than the standard lanes :-)

YMMV of course

QRC3288

..it's a fair point. HK security is insanely fast. I don't think I've ever waited longer than 10 minutes to go through security at HKIA - and even that would seem like an excruciatingly long time given what's standard there.

However, sometimes the exit immigration queue (for non-HK residents) looks long. Many of us don't worry about that with HKID, but I could imagine how it would be a great benefit to paid F and maybe J pax if they had access to some type of expedited immigration, if they don't have HKID

mach92

HKG LHR Excellent (HKG based crew) One male LHR based was rude only with Cathay 3 years.

LHR JFK LHR both ways good!

LHR HKG LHR based crew not friendly, seemed they did not like working for Cathay.

mach92

Agree inbound from CGK wait was 32 minutes.

Wait from LHR @ 7am was 10 minutes.

Either way it would be nice if CX would have a fast track lane for F.

Conkers

You should raise this with Cathay - that's poor, and unusual in my experience.

xinmpg

MarcoPolo Gold (and some other FF programs with a certain status) qualify for HKIA's eChannel immigration line. You get a barcode on your passport. They scan that, then do a biometric check, and you're in. Very similar to HKID holder's. You can also get this if you're eligible for the HKIA Frequent Visitor card, which is also very easy to get itself. Visit HK six times within two years. this is simple if you transit through HKG ever. As long as your layover is over 90 minutes you almost always have plenty of time to go both ways through immigration, and the Starbucks queue at G21 before your flight

ernestnywang

What do you mean? CX doesn't fly trans-Atlantic, or do you mean something else?

maortega15

Take note the OP also mentioned BA!

pogonation

You forgot to mention service. For me the CX service beats BA hands-down, so for me CX takes first place because it delivers on the things that really count (seat and service) ^

brunos

This is a nobrainer to me. BA seats are small, lack privacy and packed. The new BA seats are a refreshment of the old ones without additional space. BA seating F feels more like J on other airlines.
I find food/wines better on BA. BA service is good but they have to cater to 14 pax in 747s, not 9. AVOD is much better on CX with larger screens.
Concord room in LHR is great compared to CX F lounges in HK, and I have access to all F lounges anyway with my OW emerald. Both airlines are poor on ground escort and priorities.
As seating is the major determinant, I would always choose CX F over BA F. However, I would choose BA J upperdeck over CX J anytime. And I prefer old J to new J for overnight travel (privacy and noise).

pianoperson

Have to agree with previous post
CX beats BA F hands down due to the greater privacy and spaciousness of the F Cabin and the truly outstanding comfort and size of the Suites and the much better IFE and the always exemplary cabin crew and ground and Lounge staff.
I have long avoided BA due to many bad experiences both inflight and more especially with Customer Relations however I did fly them in F recently ....
It was a very mixed experience.
Check in was barely polite - no great interest or warmth - coldly efficient.
On arriving at the Lounges the lady at the F counter told me in condescending tones that I needed the other counter without even looking at my proffered BB in F
I could pass that off but it was the complete lack of any apology when I handed over my BP .... and I have to say this was one of my irritations with BA in the past - staff that were frequently patronizing and condescending.
I can't being to imagine any CX behaving in that manner.
Things were better on board - the crew were friendly and attentive - though there were only 3 of us in F on the 777
The old F cabin was tired and dated with appalling IFE - I didn't really like the I-pads but at least they were trying to do something
Seat was narrow and cramped compared to many of the competitors and it sounds like NF is not a significant improvement
As others have said - that CX only have 9 suites in F compared to the 14 of BA on the 747 is reason enough.
I'm flying BA again later this year in F and am hoping to sample the new F for myself.
In the meantime I have a trip on QF A380 in F - MEL to LHR to enjoy ..
A fan of the plane and the food but my previous outing on QF F A380 had a very mixed crew .... and although the new Suites are a huge improvement I think on the QF F on the 747 - there was a of noise and light pollution from neighbouring seats - a real flaw in the design I thought ....
So for me at present CX F is the best offering on OW with QF on the A380 and then BA F