Leaping_Deere

I find this thread in some ways a bit sobering. If any of you are readers of the BA forum you will see many a flier doing their best to leave the Mothership.

Although I credit to BA, I try to avoid BA on long haul where possible and I am a big fan of CX. I haven't flow with them this year but I used them alot in 2017 on my shuttles to AUS/NZ I also used Cathay Dragon in 2016 (as it was then) and the short haul J product even at it's worst still made the european carriers seem like Air Asia.

Whilst I'm sure it's frustrating when you see something you like go down the wayside and after a quick look the CX FFP programme looks a bit........but to alot of fliers out there, you've got it good.

swingaling

As a US-based flyer, I really like CX. Service is better and 1,000x more consistent than what I get from AA; and the hard product is as good or better than the very best of what AA/UA/DL/BA/IB/LH/LX/AF/KL offer. Food is generally fine, and typically better than the dog food AA serves on their TATL/TPAC flights. Sure, SQ has better service than CX and generally better food too. And I don't think anyone would disagree that SIN is a better airport as well. But CX still has a good product. Granted, MPO is a terrible program...

That said, QR bests CX in many respects. Better food, hard product (QSuites are amazing) and slightly better service. QR on the ground is worse. DOH is small and lounge options are dire if you're not traveling paid J/F on QR (status or no). And in terms of spending a long layover in Doha or Hong Kong, there's no comparison. Hong Kong is an amazingly vibrant city. Doha is a hot, dusty backwater.

Those are certainly fair criticisms of CX and I can't comment on PR as I've never flown them. While I've had the opportunity to fly PR, I actively avoid traveling on them for one big reason.

MNL airport is just horrible; I'd rather transit almost any other airport over MNL. Especially if the transit involves a terminal change. It's ridiculously inefficient in almost every aspect. Infrastructure supporting the airport is woefully insufficient. Don't get me started on T3's broken air con drama, tiny gate areas, disgusting bathrooms, prison chic interior design, etc.

I will acknowledge they did a pretty good job on the renovation of T1 at NAIA, but the fact that you have to take a taxi to transfer between terminals is a bad joke. At least they've put a stop to the bullet scams...

For all those reasons, I'll gladly transit HKG (or BKK, TPE, PEK, CGK, KUL, etc) even if it means I might not get a towel holder or cup and saucer for my hot cocoa.

QSuites are excellent. I've flown them on the 351 and the 77W; both are very good. Not quite as spacious as a typical F seat obviously, but that's reflected in the price. Service on both flights was top notch and the food was generally quite good. Though food quality varies based on route (ex-CMB wasn't so great). Easily the best J I've flown, by a huge margin. It stacks up favorably to F in general, though service is not as attentive or personalized as what you'd get from SQ or KE F (due to crew workloads). It's certainly better than AA's poor imitation of an F product on their 77W fleet...

I share your preference and I'm based in the US. I'd greatly prefer not to make a domestic US connection coming from a TPAC/TATL. QR flies to MIA, so that would be a good option unless you're going to Tallahassee or *shudder* Pensacola. I don't think MIA has QSuites yet, but they will eventually.

Microtat

Hi all..

i am just starting to fly abit more recently, and also started to fly more one world, especially CX..

Comparing a few airlines which i been on as of late, namely SQ, NH, MH, i still find CX’s offering to be more consistent. No doubt the onboard food can be relooked into, or rather must be looked into..

Hard product, I think the much put down 359s are fine.. I have no issues with the lavatories nor the seats as widely put down here..
Seats wise, the overall J seats are good in my opinion, as long as i do not get on the regional J product on an overnite service..

i believe MPC is still on the few ( if not only) to offer silver members priority boarding and lounge access as long as you are flying with CX.. It’s still a generous programme, except that award seats are getting more difficult to find..

Things can definitely be improved in many areas, but so far i (may be one the few) am still happy with CX. Perhaps the airline is really far from her glory days, she still offers a comparatively good product offering from ground to the air.

Sorry to be on the other side of the fence, but this airline still deserves some credit despite all the cost cutting measures in place..

CXYYZ

I'm sorry but I find the "5 years ago" premise to be ludicrous, although 10 years ago you might have something. To review where we were 5 years ago:

• coffin J on much of the long-haul fleet
• shell seats on long-haul Y
• those old-style seats in regional J with the horrific little low resolution PTV screens in, no in-seat power, etc. I believe those seats were introduced in the 1990s
• the Pier was a deeply unpleasant place to visit (at least on the J side)
• none of the investment in outport lounge hard/soft product
• in-flight food was still bad. I distinctly remember the loathed "supper" service having been around for a DXB flight in 2013
• KA fleet inconsistent availability of IFE

I am not defending CX. Proportionately, I fly them way less than I used to but this is because the competition has improved by leaps and bounds while CX has not tried hard enough to keep up. There are stronger arguments than those about the "good old days."

kaka

lhr tyo kix sfo lax jfk- a few destinations where cx holds frequencies way above the competitors (hx uo excluded- if i want frequencies i dont want to deal w delays that last until whenever) it would be hard to look for a competitor that doesnt just hold few flights a day at a time cx doesnt fly.
otherwise, hopefully cx is replacable. many of their service/hard product is crap. broken chairs, screaming fas, dirty seats...

HaikalS

I chose CX initially driven by schedule. However over time it's grown on me a bit and even with all of its imperfections I still think it's pretty good.

My big pet peeve tho is the "surprise" regional J that pops up on 4+ hour flights. It really is not comparable to SQ regional J and SQ is even phasing out that product

Having said that most of my longhaul travel is now spread around. This year 2x with EK, 5x with SQ, 2x CI, 1x BR, 1x JL and 1x QR.

For long haul somehow the schedule doesn't become much of a differentiator for me (being based partially in CGK means I have to transit anyway to most places) and others' product is pretty competitive (or even better is some dimensions as discussed above)

clubeurope

If I can chime in, I would have to agree that CX is definitely no match to QR, and SQ, BR and JL is ahead in terms of its inflight offerings (still dislike SQ's seats though), and I have moved much of my long haul travel to QR.

But despite the deterioration in quality, I still take the odd long haul flight on CX and almost always fly to East Asia on CX. I spent much time as a kid in Hong Kong, and travelling on CX and going through HKG just brings about a comforting sense of familiarity that isn't offered by QR and DOH. It feels nice to be miles away from home and coming into the plane to see a familiar ambiance which may not always be the best in class. In my experience, QR is very polished in J, almost to an extent that makes it feel robotic or cold (the Burgundy mood light and theme certainly doesn't help). CX by comparison feels much warmer, and its nice to have a crew who loves to exchange jokes and light hearted small talk.

bagold

While CX isn't great, I have to say I value the non-stop option. Once in a while I do EK and QR but the connection really kills my routine to get a proper sleep. I normally can sleep 8-10 hours on the flight arriving refreshed. With EK and QR it really breaks the sleep up into chucks that makes it hard for me to feel fresh when I arrive.

I have an option to fly EK F to ADD or ET J direct. Even though I really don't like ET J, I'm taking the direct option this time because the EK connection is just too long.

travelinmanS

FlyPointyEnd

T3's aircon has been fixed from what I heard, its alot cooler than before, as for the bathrooms just stick with the bathrooms in the lounge. About that bullet scam, I believe it was somewhat resolved under the present management of the airport, "if" a bullet is found its confiscated and the passenger is free to go. Being based in Manila I have no choice but fly through NAIA and it looks like it will stay that way for the next 10-15 years since the government has not yet finalize where to build a new airport.

Cup and saucers and trays aside I think PAL is doing a lot better than 5 years ago under San Miguel Corp. They are now back to being a full service airline, even domestic business class serve proper meals even on 1 hour flights. I heard on long haul they now do Dine on Demand for business..if only they could fix their airport terminal.

FlyPointyEnd

Definitely the current J is far superior but remember that 5 years ago many airlines don't even offer a full flat seat...right now CX is no longer ahead of the pack. While I do think the current design is still a solid product, they haven't innovated enough.

sxc

cassiohui

this is exactly why i gave up on mpc and joined baec despite being based in hk

SLGO

Microtat