Platinum A332

In my view the QF F offering is a wonderful product, although I have only tried it a few times. It is however not a perfect product.

- Service onboard can be the down point particularly in my experience from the LHR based crew. For example on a flight LHR-DXB they forgot to give jackets back on landing.
- Also the first hosts on the ground seem to be a hit or miss in that they are sometimes there and are sometimes not there.

Some advantages of QF;
- Access to the best available lounges in most ports (DXB/SYD/MEL and now also LAX). Loses out in London to BA T5 Concorde room.
- A very spacious product in my experience. It lacks doors but still feels very private.
- excellent catering, particularly the degustation menus.
- when the service is great (on 2/3 occasions) it is both professional and personable. Unmatched on any other airline.

I think QF is up there on the routes where it offers the product, including DXB and LHR.

Kiwi Flyer

SQ, TG and KE have first class all the way from Australia to Europe.

Dave Noble

deleted

m0hamed

Have you actually been to the CCR? I find it unbelievable that anyone would rate it above the SYD QF F Lounge. The only part of the CCR that appeals to pax, IMO, is the exclusive access policy. Once you've been there you're bound to be disappointed.

I find EY and EK's F catering eclipses QF by far.

Dave Noble

The exclusive access policies of some 1st lounges are things that do make a big improvement to them. I would rate from meals I have had at QF F lounges and the BA CCR , BA to be ahead and with the (ime) less busy lounge, the BA Concorde Room to be better

I would also rate TG's 1st lounge in BKK over the QF lounges

If the QF 1st lounge was limited to 1st class passengers then it would be a lot more pleasant. In this instance I assumed that the person was pointing out that there is no access to the Concorde Room at Heathrow due to being in T3

Lounges are not something I would class generally as a major component since my aim is to spend as little time in them as possible

bensyd

He didn't say it was better than the SYD F lounge.@:-)

Platinum A332

As per bensyd I never said it was better than the QF F lounges. I said QF loses out in terms of better lounges in London to the BA T5 Concorde Room. Please reread my post.

Dave Noble

QF also misses out on having decent lounges in Dallas I suspect

It is easy to have good lounges in most ports when there are about only 6 ports left where 1st class is offered from ( SYD, MEL, LAX, DFW, DXB, LHR )

RichardMEL

My 2 cents...

This thread underlines for me how everyone has different a) requirements b) perceptions c) experiences and d) preferences. Everyone has their own opinion based on these, and nobody's is any better or worse than anyone elses based on very specific and personal criteria.

For me, QF F is a very good product OVERALL but has elements that could be better when compared to airlines like CX and EK which I have enjoyed over the years. SQ has great F&B options and good hard product (I have not tried Suites Class) but some can be off put by the FA training/service attitudes/sometimes rigidity (the word "robotic" has been used more than once over the years).. Personally I've found CX to have the warmest most genuine FA's in F with a style that is a mix of polite, professional, friendly but not cloying or fawning (TG have tried to treat me like the King of Siam, and that's personally offputting to me, but that's my nature). QF have a mix like all air crews and some are better than others... some styles can be different. I'd also note that the LHR based crews (English) who do LHR-DXB v.v. I personally feel to be amongst the best I've experienced. Not sure why. Again just a personal opinio. EK crews are good and very friendly (and I'll be in EK F in ~12 hours as I write this) but there's something of the forced smile with some. Anyone who's watched the FA's representing EK at the Melbourne Cup having to stand and smile for minutes and minutes at a go during long speeches can probably relate to the look. Again, some individuals I have come across have been absolutely delightful so let's not make rash generalisations.

The QF suites... in general I find them a funny design but in bed mode they are very nice (but so is EK and CX)... I do like the IFE too, though EK's has a wider selection too.

I've become a real fan of the La Grande Dame (VC) thanks to QF.. it's up there with the Dom 2004 on EK (or maybe it's 2006 I forget). again a personal preference. I find the EK catering to be generally good without being over the top insane (had more of that eg shark fin soup and the like) on SQ). CX was a mix. QF... (Perry) I reckon is "jumped up comfort food" but probably of a quality on par with EK, maybe a little better in some cases, and worse in others (dear God the Mac n Cheese I had once, supposedly a rockpool thing, was disgusting!). CX I would say was superior and SQ with the choice of coffee beans to grind and all the rest fantastic. I've not flown EY or QR to compare, but reports, specially on QR, compare very well and I plan to try and get on them.

re flying to USA CX did come to mind as a reasonably viable option, and the CX Wing is fantastic.. oh to have a soaking bath and some great food in the lounge is worth it, and even CX's J product for the 9-10 hours to HKG, if the day flight, is just fine IMHO but it is true it's more time/miles, price and no F cabin all the way (although did I not read someplace CX were going to put 77W's with F onto SYD for some flights?).

UA is zero competition in F. Seriously. nothing to see there.

I think the F lounges at SYD and MEL are very very good - but mostly for the cooked to order meals and chairside service (I don't use the spa for massages or the like). Wing is better for the cabanas and so on and the pensula food but the QF lounges are really very very good compared to many other F lounges out there, and the new F Lounge at LAX supposed to be to a similar standard is a huge improvement there and will really add to the product offering, specially if a connection or a long layover is involved.

At the end of the day everyone's mileage various, different requirements, preferences and priorities... QF F is certainly up there as a product.. not if you compare to the Apartments and Residences and showers of the middle east, but given the relatively low seat count and route count QF is down to with the F product, they do a pretty good job of it.

I think personally if I could fly any carrier I have experienced on any route my own preferences would probably go something like CX/EK/QF/SQ...... daylight ...... AA,UA

og

I completely disagree that the TG F BKK lounge is better than the QF F SYD lounge. But that's just my opinion after spending 6 hrs in the BKK F lounge and multiple visits to the SYD F lounge. The TG BKK F lounge is about as good as a good J lounge but with better staff service, better food and no one else around. The only part of the BKK TG lounge(s) that beats SYD QF F is the massage service.

And, being a Concorde snob, I considered in 2002 that the Concorde lounge in LHR was simply a lounge that held ~ 100 excited pax for an hour or two before staggering onto Concorde - all primed with as much fizzy wine and bacon rolls as could be served in the time. The best part of that lounge was watching the bird being towed to the gate right in-front of the lounge and direct access to avoid the riff-raff in the terminal.

m0hamed

Now that is cool. Now, however it's just disinterested waitering staff who forget orders, mix up drinks and have a similar menu to the GF at T5. The CCR staff don't compare to QF staff and in GF I witnessed lounge staff using the PCs, hold a meeting amongst us in the dining area while the other staff chatted in the kitchen. I literally had to knock on the lichen service door to get their attention.

Dave Noble

The better service, better food and soft drink options than the QF F lounge and having a small room to myself with no one else makes the TG lounge nicer than the QF lounge to me

The Concorde Room that existsed when Concorde was operating does not even exist now and the one in T5 is very different - plus a limited access entitlement

tng11

Well, all we can conclude from this thread is that everyone's experience in F is really subjective.

Come to think of it, I actually rate the QF F MEL lounge very highly - in fact I liked the dining there more than the LH FCT (aside from the Iberico ham) or the SQ TPR and the spa treatment was a really nice touch. I also thought the dining on-board and wines were amazing - nothing too fancy but the food was of good quality (better than CX, LH or TG despite the lack of caviar). Simplicity seems to be the best policy for onboard catering - LH for instance, tries too hard to be fancy and it ends up being executed poorly in the air. Hard product is also great - I thought it was some of the best bedding I've ever had and there was no shortage of space and a good amount of privacy on the A side.

The only real gripe I have is with the soft product. I had a very indifferent and mediocre crew from MEL-DXB, but an out-of-this-world amazing LHR-based crew on the DXB-LHR segment. It was like flying a completely different airline for me.

LHR/MEL/Europe FF

I disagree!

I've done half a dozen UA F flights in the last few years and have found them all to be 'good' with the exception of two which were truly outstanding (so good in fact they outranked CX and SQ).

The UA bed is very comfortable, and while the food can only be described as 'comfort food' (at best), that's not the most important part of a flight for me. Sleep and service are. And UA delivers consistently on the first, and does very well on the second.

QF has a better on-board product on paper - but when you have inconsistent crews that product can fail miserably. For that reason I rank QF and UA on par for an overall travel experience based on the average of all the flights I have done.

Aspen

Concorde Lounge at JFK was the same with the direct access to the beautiful bird, alcohol was also flowing despite the 9.00am departure on BA2