JAL vs CX
 

I have flown trans-Pacific on CX a couple of times in C and it was an excellent flight, especially using the facilities at HKG. I am planning to fly JFK - PEK in C (part of a OW190C) and there are routes via NRT on JAL and via HKG on CX. CX has a non-stop to HKG and several routes connecting via SFO or YVR.

Question - how is the JAL flight and service. do they have facilities similar to HKG upon arrival.

Is there much difference between the two airlines?

thanks for the feedback.

JL is not usable on a oneworld award until April next year ... so your question is a bit academic (unless you really think you need 5 months to make up your mind before redeeming the award).

JL is quite poor in J compared to CX. Closer to AA than to CX for J service. NRT lounges are primitive (hint: the AC at NRT is generally considered to be superior to the JL J lounge). Nothing like the Wing/Pier is offered by JL. Overall JL is an average to poor airline, but has a couple of specific premium routes that have stellar service. If you happen to fly one of those routes (maybe 1% of JL services), then it can be really good (particularly in F), but otherwise it is dismal. JL brings new routes and cities to the table, but not an improvement in service over CX.

nvm... i'm blind.

It sounds like you've been spending too much time on the drinking thread on AA.

JL does have several nice lounges, but they are all private lounges (like the Concorde room), and not J or F lounges ... thus JL will not have to allow any Oneworld trash into their good lounges. BA seems to have refused to move to the JL terminal at NRT (AA, CX and AY are moving there in Jan); probably because the lounge arrangement was unacceptable to BA.

Oh, oops! My glossy eyes skipped right over the "is" in "Nothing like the Wing/Pier is offered by JL." My apologies.

Unless you have a thing for Jap, stick to CX. Having flown on JAL several times, J class included, everything revolves around the Japanese way of life. The only service they cannot offer now is a hot tub on their JAL express. FAs are fluent in Jap and once in a while, a few GEMS will speak fluent English.

Actually, I had the chance to fly both JL and CX in business class this year.

What you want to avoid are the routes flown by the old business class on JL. The new shell seats are pretty much identical to CX's, with fractionally better AVOD. I'm not sure which routes don't have the new seats now, though...pretty sure that LAX/SFO/ORD have them.

In flight service I would actually give the nod to JL over CX.

The JL lounges are nothing with nothing; a bit better than an AC but nothing special. Obviously, it doesn't compare with the Wing/Pier -- but, OTOH, for Bangkok connections at least, the layover was 2 hours instead of 4.5, and to be honest, after you've done the Wing/Pier once, I think you'd rather than the 2.5 hours back :)

Steve

I'm flying (AA) LAX-NRT (JL) NRT-BKK Saturday, with a 2 hour layover in NRT. Is that enough time to transfer from Terminal 1 to 2? I assume we'll need to walk to the shuttle bus gate in Terminal 1, wait for the shuttle, ride to Terminal 2, then go through security and walk to the JL gate. Being winter, I'm concerned about LAX-NRT being delayed due to strong winds. We're in F LAX-NRT and J NRT-BKK, so maybe JL will meet us at the gate if we're late?

2 hours is usually enough time. AA generally adjusts its scheduled flying time based on the seasons.

The LAX-SAN Eagle flight was delayed 3 hours. Eagle hired two vans to drive the pax to LA, but we missed the LAX-NRT flight and were put on the same flight the next day. We took off late and landed in NRT about 30 minutes late. We then had to wait 20 minutes for the bus to Terminal 1, and then had to take the shuttle train to the part of the terminal where our flight was, but we still made it OK. We got there about 10 minutes before they started boarding.

To address the original topic of this post, since we flew CX in J in November, and JL in J last week and the week before, I can say that CX is superior. CX has better food, better service, and has good amenity kits. One JL flight still had the old J seats, which are even worse than the current AA J seats. On that flight, there were no amenity kits, but the FAs did walk through the cabin with a basket of amenity supplies that we could take from (eye mask, face mask, earplugs -- no skin lotion, razors, or anything like that). There was also only one lav upstairs. The other JL flight had the new shell seats, which are a big improvement, but seemed a bit narrower and more sloped than CX. That flight had amenity kits, but they were identical to the items in the basket. That plane had two lavs upstairs.

I've flown on the new JL shell flat seats many times, and find them roughly equivalent to the CX NBC seats in terms of comfort, although they feel a bit narrower. The JL J section can occupy 2/3 of the plane. A couple of weeks ago I was in a JL 747 NRT-JFK where, except for the nose area for J, and the very last section (between the second bulkhead and the rear of the plane) it was all J. There must have been 30 rows of J in the main deck.

Service is a toss-up, with perhaps a slight edge to CX. Foodwise, I much prefer JL's offerings, not even a question in my mind. CX's food in J can be easily disappointing. CX is a winner in the lounges.

As for comparing JL to AA, that's not meaningful. AA is an unmitigated piece of crap compared to JL, and of course, to CX.

In F, except for the AVOD, where CX wins hands down, I'd rather fly JL than CX, actually. I find the food and the service in JL to be better overall than CX. Especially the food.

CX has definitely better AVOD, with a much better selection.

It really depends on the route. JL J service is very market driven, and varies by routes (luckily most US routes now have the better JL service). JL has in-air J service on some routes that is worse than AA J. Plus JL ground service is very polite and very ineffective. There is a complete lack of empowerment for first-line JL employees. So you get absurdly bad service, but lots of "very sorry" and "nothing we can do" -- when 99% of the airlines in the world can and will do better. Overall I consider JL to be a below average airline because of this (re-routing, irregular ops and last-minute changes are very important for me). JL J is poor, and I stand by that asessment; JL F is much better. However both are not competitive with CX. Even Japanese businessmen are now flying CX on NRT-HKG -- an unheard of act of betrayal, to not fly JL.

Sure, the onboard JL service is obsequious at all times, but I don't count that as good service, and simply cannot agree that "AA is an unmitigated piece of crap compared to JL". In fact overall I rate AA as a superior airline to JL.

I did these exact flights (except AA was in J as well) four times last year (and also two SJC connects) and never had a problem. That said, I was never on a flight that was dramatically late.

Typically I could standing in the Sakura lounge in the T2 Satellite 25 minutes after they opened the doors. The rice-cake thingies (pardon me for not knowing the Japanese name for them) in the Sakura lounge are very yummy.

JL707 is often operated by a 3 class bird sold as two; you want to be seated in the first three rows (which was typically automatic for me if I was ticketed in JL D class). It was normally the old F coffins, but they were pretty good for sleeping in my book -- and the service in the "faux" F cabin was always very excellent.

Others differ, but I remain a big JL fan.

Steve

My experience with JL and irregular ops is limited, perhaps because they have less of those than AA, where "regular ops" is the exception and not the rule. Perhaps my view of AA is colored after taking almost 24 hours longer than necessary to traverse from DFW to BOS a couple of days ago. My experience with JL irregular ops corresponds to one time between GMP and HND, where the plane went mechanical in HND, and so they sent another one over (resulting in two-hour delay), but in the domestic configuration. This meant that the J seats weren't as nice, and thus I was effectively "downgraded". I was given an envelope with cash for my troubles.

As for onboard service, AA in any class is a grating experience, but especially in J, where the disconnect between AA and the competition is the most glaring.

As to why businessmen may be flying CX has nothing to do with service. It has to do with the fact that JL has gotten a lot of bad press for being a perennial moneyloser and every little maintenance oversight ends up in the front page of the newspaper.

Yep.. YVR would be one of them. Skyluxe seats (aka CX RBC) on a transpacific sector? You gotta be joking!