starbucks_MUC

Hi,

I am wondering how Air Canada's new business class compares to Lufthansa's. I'd appreciate if somebody with first hand experience could share some thoughts.

Thanks!

totti

I have no first hand experience but from the pictures the seat looks quite similar to CX, NZ and VS. So I'd expect that the seat is much more comfortable because it's a real flat bed. ^

skywalkerLAX

AC's C-class is very much comparable to NZ's Premier Business that I used several times on LHR-LAX ^

The seat is very comfortable and lie-flat ! AC's inflight service is very good and the food offerings are great as well, especially ex Canada ^

starbucks_MUC

Thanks for the reply, that's good to hear! I'll be flying MUC-YYZ and the AC website claims that they already have the new business class on that route. Is that information to be trusted?

SanDiego1K

My understanding is that Air Canada, New Zealand, and Virgin all have nearly similar seats/beds. I recently flew Virgin Upper Class and liked the seat very much. It was great to have a fully flat bed. I liked it far more than the Lufthansa slanted biz seats. I'll be flying the new Air Canada equipment yet this month.

htb

Well, for the first few replies I wasn't sure what the difference was, because LH's seats are flat as well. Just not horizontal. But things can be flat without having to be horizontal...

Thanks SanDiego1K for clearing up any misunderstanding!

HTB.

totti

Well, we discussed this issue just some days go in this thread. For some of us lie-flat means horizontal and for others it doesn't. From the thread quoted above it is quite obvious that most FTers read lie-flat = horizontal. And I guess my wording was also quite clear: "real flat bed." At least the beds I find in hotel rooms and at home are horizontal.

Cheers
totti (looking forward to get some sleep in his horizontal bed at home now )

SmilingBoy

The accepted terminology is:

lie-flat = flat but at an angle
flat-bed = horizontal

Burj

This is a common misconception but there is in fact TWO distinct designs that are significantly different.

VS pioneered one design in their "Upper Class" and this design was licensed by NZ, lets call this this the "flip seat" which I'll explain bellow.

CX, AC, Jet Airways, and Delta all use a similar design that is different, we'll call this the "recline seat".

When the "recline seat" design came out VS actually sued the company that makes it, I'm not sure if that went anywhere.

So what is the difference? There are two...

First the "Flip Seat" is wider and the ottoman accordingly can be used as a second seat. This allows people to sit and face each other to talk, OR if the table is pulled out, to dine together. On VS and NZ the ottoman even has its own seatbelt built in and and this is a feature that both advertise. The ottoman on the "Recline Seat" is much smaller and often times there is a sticker/sign above it that tell you explicitly NOT TO SIT on it.

The second difference is that with the "Flip Seat" to make it into a flat bed you have to get OUT of the seat and then the seat FLIPS FORWARD so that the sleeping surface is formed by the BACK of the seat.

With the "Recline Seat" you can remain in the seat while it becomes a flat bed since the seat simply continues to recline to form a flat surface, thus the seating surface forms the sleeping surface.

So what does this mean? Well for the "Flip Seat" the sleeping surface is dedicated to sleeping so it is a much more comfortable "matress" type material. Also, the sitting surface is dedicated to sitting so it makes a more comfortable chair...HOWEVER in the chair mode, it will note recline as far as most people are use to, so it is not as good as a "recliner" type chair.

With the "Recline Seat" the seat has many many more positions between the upright "sitting mode" and the flat bed "sleeping mode." HOWEVER since one surface has to be both the sitting and the sleeping surface, it is a compromise. I've been in the AC product and I found the seat narrow and not that comfortable as a seat....

Informally talking to people I've gotten the impression that the VS and NZ flip seat is superior because the sleeping surface is better and because it is wider.

How this compares to the LH product I can't say...but I just wanted to clarify that there is a difference between the VS/NZ product and the AC/DL/CX/Jet product...

Shofar

Thank you Burj for a very comprehensive explanation.

AC new C was comfortable enough for me and I am not a narrow person, though I agree it is not a wide seat. It was comfortable though like a cacoon but not bad. The other advantage if you are flying alone is that all the seats are "single" as even the center seats angle away from each other.

Service is very good, however food was a real letdown. I expected Canadian beef to be good but it was so tough (3X) that it was inedible.

Not having flown in either Virgin or NZ new C, I can recommend SQ new C (J). It is the "flip" variety and so wide even I felt it was really roomy. IMHO it is better than old SQ F as a seat and bed.

Shofar

Axey

A very good summary ^ And I couldn't agree more that the VS/NZ seat beats the pants off the ripoff product. Hands down.

totti

If I can avoid any confusion by making this distinction I'll will use it from now on. So thanks for making me aware of it. ^

Unfortunately I doubt that everybody accepts this terminology… At least I'll add this to the M&M Guide Glossary.

totti

Thanks for this very informative and helpful post Burj. ^

trooper

Yes.. nicely put indeed....

And put me down as a "+1" for preferring the NZ seat over the AC one (same when it comes to food/service/ife too actually IMO...)

... although in terms of the SEAT at least we are talking about the difference between good and very good if you ask me... I slept well in the AC seat too.... Beat the crap out of an angled lie flat or cradle seat...

Ziegenhorn

The AC seat and the IFE system are 3-5 years ahead of the LH seat. AC also offers a larger and more modern screen than LH. And as quoted in this thread and elsewhere the AC seat is 180° whilst the LH seat is angled (168°?). Also AC mood lighting is great and the YYZ AC terminal is modern and pleasant, beating Frankenstein airport). However the LH inflight service (choice of wines, drinks, quality of menu) are miles ahead of AC's product, and this includes the attention of the FAs. One exception: AC offers Kellogg's cereals for breakfast with fresh milk from the jar, something I have only seen in SQ C, but not in LH C.

On the AC AVOD and before comments come up: the Airshow/map now worked when I last flew last week, something that was noted not to be working in the past.

In summary: For a night flight, when you really need to slep in order to be fit next day (and you go to sleep straight after take off w/o dinner) then AC beats LH. If your flight is daytime and you want to enjoy service then LH is your airline.

One other point: AC now beats any other North American and South American airline (maybe except LAN) in C by light years and is therefore a welcome choice for folks in Latam needing to fly up north to the US.