Confirmed: QF to add SYD-DFW but drop SYD-SFO
Jan 13, 2011, 10:29 pm
#16
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,552
If flying economy, at least you can get economy plus for a low price to get legroom until you have done a cpl of trips to get status
Flying to DFW for QF, would def seem to be a better option for onward connections if wanting to connect onwards onto AA
Dave
Jan 13, 2011, 11:46 pm
#17
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Programs: M&M SEN, Amex Plat, Club Carlson, Marriott, HHonors & Accor Gold, Velocity Silver, Qantas Bronze
Posts: 3,767
UA between SYD and SFO is fully horizontal bed - what can be better? Oh yes, some will argue food. But I prefer good sleep... That's why I pay premium for business class - for good sleep, not for food/booze...
Jan 14, 2011, 12:07 am
#18
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SYD
Programs: QF WP/LTG | UA P
Posts: 13,530
UA has perfectly adequate food and drinks and can provide plenty of both. They also have hot nuts in a bowl instead of a messy foil packet. Its a small touch but nice with drinks and makes the soft product quite pleasant.
Jan 14, 2011, 12:35 am
#19
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia; NYC, LHR, GVA
Programs: UA 1K 2MM; QF 1P; DJ WP; CX DIA, EK GL, HH DIAMOND; PC Spire RA; SPG PLAT; HERTZ PC; Avis CC
Posts: 255
You might want to review this UA thread before leaping:
More SYD/MEL related delays/cancellation [Merged Threads]
More SYD/MEL related delays/cancellation [Merged Threads]
I take the transpac evey two weeks either with QF or UA. Here are my observations:
- Customs and Immigration in LAX is awful. AS a non citizen in some cases (more than 3 times a year) it has taken me 2-3 hours in the queue to clear customs/immigration.
- DFW is not much better. In my limited experience (around 6 times) DFW customs are also very slow.
- Atleast 3-4 times a year I have had a situation where the flight in LAX/SFO have arrived (hour plus) late. Most of the time this has been a QF flight (40%-60%).
- The benefit of flying UA was that UA managed to pro-actively protect me (as a UA1K) on the onward legs even on sold out flights. As a QF WP, even if they really wanted to, QF could not protect me on the onward AA flights. For me wasting a day in LAX is considerably more inconvenient than spending 14 hours on ANY other carrier. As a rule I would pay more, for less comfort if the carrier promised and the ability to get me to the destination on-time (or close to time as possible). After all that is why I fly.
I do not think my travel patters with change too much as I always tend to fly UA from Australia to the US mainly expecting delays. But I can see a few flights going to UA that would have gone to QF in the past.
Last edited by chandi; Jan 14, 2011 at 3:10 am Reason: what a typo
Jan 14, 2011, 2:29 am
#20
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Programs: Amex Plat, CX Gold, VA Gold, BA paeon, VS rabble, NZ A$ bru
Posts: 235
For my money, SYD-AKL-SFO on Air New Zealand (booked via a Virgin Atlantic code share, natch) is looking the most attractive of the bunch. No LAX, no United, and transfer through the Koru Lounge in AKL.
Just avoid the trans-Tasman aircraft with the "yes, Y with no middle seat is totally worth J prices" nonsense and it'll be a pleasant trip.
Just avoid the trans-Tasman aircraft with the "yes, Y with no middle seat is totally worth J prices" nonsense and it'll be a pleasant trip.
Jan 14, 2011, 2:31 am
#21
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London, Sydney
Programs: Muccihood de la Rotisserie Doree, BAEC Gold, SAS Eurobonus basic, Ansett Golden Wing :-(
Posts: 3,114
Jan 14, 2011, 4:11 am
#23
Moderator, Hilton Honors
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: on a short leash
Programs: some
Posts: 71,422
You'll get rebooked as SYD-LAX-SFO. How long did you have to connect in SFO (I assume separate ticket with same day connection)?
Jan 14, 2011, 4:35 am
#25
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Melbourne
Programs: ►QFWP/LTG►VA WP►HyattExpl.►HiltonGold►ALL Silver
Posts: 21,991
It's not the Business seats, it's the basic removal of 34"/34" Space+ in economy.
2 x A320 [Space+ gone]
1 x Widebody (varies) - generally useless (for me) morning flights.
Jan 14, 2011, 5:12 am
#26
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Portland OR Double Emerald (QF and AA), DL PM/MM, Starwood Plat
Posts: 19,589
Jan 14, 2011, 11:11 am
#27
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold(OWE), QF LTG, MR Plat, IHG Spire, Hertz PC
Posts: 8,156
The benefit of flying UA was that UA managed to pro-actively protect me (as a UA1K) on the onward legs even on sold out flights. As a QF WP, even if they really wanted to, QF could not protect me on the onward AA flights. For me wasting a day in LAX is considerably more inconvenient than spending 14 hours on ANY other carrier. As a rule I would pay more, for less comfort if the carrier promised and the ability to get me to the destination on-time (or close to time as possible). After all that is why I fly.
Jan 14, 2011, 12:56 pm
#28
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2
As a regular United traveller between SFO - SYD, this move can only increase the United economy fares back to their over inflated prices 5 years ago. Qantas provided good competition for the SFO - SYD route and kept prices somewhat reasonable.
Jan 14, 2011, 1:18 pm
#29
Join Date: Feb 2007
Programs: NZ Koru
Posts: 6,411
This zone, currently with 18seats primarily at 32" pitch, will now increase to 21seats at 34-35" seat pitch and 18 seats are 33" seat pitch. The total number of seats on the A320 will decrease from 171 to 168 to allow for this change. Non-premium seats will remain at the standard 30" seat pitch - which as been the case since the A320 was introduced