Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Not as Great as the Hype

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 1, 2014, 7:31 pm
  #16  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Singapore / India
Programs: SQ QPP, Hilton Diamond, IHG Platinum, Taj Inner Circle Gold
Posts: 639
Originally Posted by SQ325
the coffin like arrangements or that horrible heringbone arrangement which most airlines have nowadays are not really any better in comparision.

.
The herringbone whether it's straight or is reverse is still ok with me.

The stagger layouts are even more ubiquitous and that is more laughable and dubious as business class seats.
SQueeze is offline  
Old Dec 1, 2014, 8:35 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SIN (LEJ once a year)
Programs: SQ, LH, BA, IHG Diamond AMB, HH Gold, SLH Indulged, Accor Gold, Hyatt Discoverist
Posts: 7,741
Originally Posted by Wings100
Yes, I asked for earplugs and they did not have any. The bottles of open cream, etc in the lav looked disgusting and the lav (both of them) smelled like sewage. Not that AC is better...it clearly is not. The crew and food on SQ superior to AC.
Hmm, you must have been super, super unlucky.

I can't say that I have ever seen a disgusting looking lotion bottle in the toilets and neither were they dirty or very bad smelling on SQ (unless you just happen to go immediately after someone who you know ... stunk up the place ).

Actually, in my experience the toilets on SQ flights are some of the best maintained and well kept ones on most international carriers. I commend the SQ crews for that as some passengers are really plain "gross" in what they do in there .

Service overall I'm also fine with. Yes maybe not as special and stellar as 7-10 years ago, but usually consistently good. Other carriers have caught up though and of course for the (often) premium prices SQ charges expectations do increase vastly.

YMMV.
demue is offline  
Old Dec 1, 2014, 9:02 pm
  #18  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Programs: AC-SEMM, AA-Gold
Posts: 962
My sense is that the lavs were not likely serviced properly in London. Not sure how much time they had for the turnaround.

Not sure what would have blown me away...but I just wasn't for the fare paid
Wings100 is offline  
Old Dec 1, 2014, 9:24 pm
  #19  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SIN and wandering.
Posts: 1,549
Originally Posted by Wings100
Yes, I asked for earplugs and they did not have any. The bottles of open cream, etc in the lav looked disgusting and the lav (both of them) smelled like sewage. Not that AC is better...it clearly is not. The crew and food on SQ superior to AC.
I'm surprised that the toilets were "disgusting" in SQ. This is very uncharacteristic of SQ and has never happened in my flights with them ever.

In fact, I daresay that SQ has the most well-maintained toilets on air, even in Y. The cabin crew regularly freshen up the toilets at periodic intervals throughout the flight and ensure that the supplies are kept stocked and tidy.

In First, they will enter the loos each time after a passenger has used it to tidy and refresh it.

The maintenance of the toilets during the turnaround is really just to clear the bins and do a quick clean. All the airlines do this during the turnaround. It's the regular refreshing throughout the flight that is important and makes the difference, particularly on a long sector like LHR.
SQ319 is offline  
Old Dec 1, 2014, 10:51 pm
  #20  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Little dot in Asia
Programs: AA-EP, TK-*G, HL-DM, HY-GLO, MR-LTP
Posts: 25,932
Originally Posted by Wings100
Aviationp ....agree with your assessment of AC but I was expecting a bit better on SQ

Demue - agree....the lack of an amenity kit was annoying and disappointing
Why? Have you seen the number of discarded upopened amenity kits after every long haul AC flight? Does AC recycle them? Maybe. But SQ decided to do away with it because they feel that their passengers don't value them and many don't.

It doesn't matter that you feel a little let down. If you're so used to AC service then SQ might seem different. But SQ can command the fares that AC can only dream of. Nothing to compare for service and attentiveness.

I'd certainly take SQ over AC anyday.
Guy Betsy is offline  
Old Dec 1, 2014, 10:57 pm
  #21  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Anywhere I need to be.
Programs: OW Emerald, *A Gold, NEXUS, GE, ABTC/APEC, South Korea SES, eIACS, PP, Hyatt Diamond
Posts: 16,046
Originally Posted by GRUflyer
It comes down to preference, I guess.

I cannot see why on Earth someone would choose LH, LX, BA, AA, UA or even EK over SQ if prices are similar in J.

In their bad days, SQ is better than all of those. In their good day, with a right set of crew, SQ is simply unbeatable.
eVIP to F cabin on AA on any fare if EXP
AA_EXP09 is offline  
Old Dec 1, 2014, 10:57 pm
  #22  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted by demue
Actually, in my experience the toilets on SQ flights are some of the best maintained and well kept ones on most international carriers.
Even in Y SQs crew are definetly doing a good job maintaining the toilets, in comparision european and american crew are quite reluctant to step into the passengers toilets at all.

Originally Posted by demue
Service overall I'm also fine with. Yes maybe not as special and stellar as 7-10 years ago, but usually consistently good. Other carriers have caught up though and of course for the (often) premium prices SQ charges expectations do increase vastly.
I dont really agree on that, SQs service had always been up and down since iam flying with them. The longhaul service quality seems to me a bit more steady. Short- and medium haul can be really hit or miss.
SQ325 is offline  
Old Dec 1, 2014, 11:10 pm
  #23  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Asia
Programs: KF Gold | IHG Amb | SPG LTG | HH Gold
Posts: 548
Originally Posted by SQ325
Short- and medium haul can be really hit or miss.
It's been always the case, but recently I'm getting more miss than hit. (I maybe really unlucky!)

Don't get me wrong, I love SQ - their service is above par most of the time (even on a bad day). However sometimes I find it a little hard to justify their premium, especially Y.
LuisHK is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2014, 12:25 am
  #24  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SIN (LEJ once a year)
Programs: SQ, LH, BA, IHG Diamond AMB, HH Gold, SLH Indulged, Accor Gold, Hyatt Discoverist
Posts: 7,741
Originally Posted by SQ325
Even in Y SQs crew are definetly doing a good job maintaining the toilets, in comparision european and american crew are quite reluctant to step into the passengers toilets at all.



I dont really agree on that, SQs service had always been up and down since iam flying with them. The longhaul service quality seems to me a bit more steady. Short- and medium haul can be really hit or miss.
I'm fine overall as it is still in general good or maybe on par or better than other airlines. Basically a bad day on SQ can still be manageable while on other carriers it can be an outright disaster (thinking NA or some European carriers).

In the end though experiences and opinions will vary though.
demue is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2014, 4:32 am
  #25  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 267
I've been flying SQ for around 20 years now and for this reason, they've been the de facto benchmark that I measure other airlines against (usually J). While I still think the overall product is very polished, I somehow feel that other airlines have caught up in some areas and surpassed SQ in some ways.

For example, I think QR's new hard products are better than SQ, including the seat, lounge at HIA & LHR, J pyjamas & amenity kits. Not to mention how awesome dine on demand service really is. On the flipside, I think the cabin service is fairly unpolished compared to SQ's, even though QR do try (personal greetings etc.).

Overall, I still think SQ delivers are more consistent service but in saying that, I've not yet had a 'bad' flight with QR either and they are increasingly becoming my choice of carrier for J flights.
mitwg is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2014, 5:11 am
  #26  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sao Paulo, Brazil and Porto, Portugal
Programs: AA Executive Platinum, LH FTL, FB Gold, LATAM Black Signature
Posts: 554
Originally Posted by AA_EXP09
eVIP to F cabin on AA on any fare if EXP
Try that in a couple of years if flying anywhere else other than GRU, HKG or LHR....
GRUflyer is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2014, 5:16 am
  #27  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sao Paulo, Brazil and Porto, Portugal
Programs: AA Executive Platinum, LH FTL, FB Gold, LATAM Black Signature
Posts: 554
Originally Posted by mitwg
I've been flying SQ for around 20 years now and for this reason, they've been the de facto benchmark that I measure other airlines against (usually J). While I still think the overall product is very polished, I somehow feel that other airlines have caught up in some areas and surpassed SQ in some ways.

For example, I think QR's new hard products are better than SQ, including the seat, lounge at HIA & LHR, J pyjamas & amenity kits. Not to mention how awesome dine on demand service really is. On the flipside, I think the cabin service is fairly unpolished compared to SQ's, even though QR do try (personal greetings etc.).

Overall, I still think SQ delivers are more consistent service but in saying that, I've not yet had a 'bad' flight with QR either and they are increasingly becoming my choice of carrier for J flights.
Am I the only one who does not like that?

I have been on 14+ hours flight in which I had the smell of food and tickling of glasses and silverware disturb my sleep for pretty much the entire flight.

Dine on demand for 42 J passangers is often chaotic and disorganized IMO.

I like QR, but this is one of the grips I hold agains them.
GRUflyer is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2014, 5:33 am
  #28  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Programs: EK - Silver; Accor - Silver; O6 - Gold; BAEC - Silver; Flying Blue; SPG; Krisflyer
Posts: 506
Originally Posted by mitwg
I've been flying SQ for around 20 years now and for this reason, they've been the de facto benchmark that I measure other airlines against (usually J). While I still think the overall product is very polished, I somehow feel that other airlines have caught up in some areas and surpassed SQ in some ways.

For example, I think QR's new hard products are better than SQ, including the seat, lounge at HIA & LHR, J pyjamas & amenity kits. Not to mention how awesome dine on demand service really is. On the flipside, I think the cabin service is fairly unpolished compared to SQ's, even though QR do try (personal greetings etc.).

Overall, I still think SQ delivers are more consistent service but in saying that, I've not yet had a 'bad' flight with QR either and they are increasingly becoming my choice of carrier for J flights.
Only flew once with QR in J, and I must agree the dine on demand was great. I found it allows me to adjust better to new time zone.

With regards to SQ services, I don't really agree with you about consistency. I travel to NRT from SIN about 3 times a year, and almost always on SQ. The service fluctuate a lot IMHO.

A friend of mine was ex-SQ (since ground bound due to age), and her opinion was that it's more difficult to train newer crew then during her time. This is cause most young Singaporeans gets to travel a lot more, and the magic of flying is not as strong as compared to say 15~20 years ago. During those golden years, SQ's FA will work very hard to please because they truly believe they were the elite of the skys.
lighthand is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2014, 5:58 am
  #29  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Programs: AC-SEMM, AA-Gold
Posts: 962
Originally Posted by Guy Betsy
Why? Have you seen the number of discarded upopened amenity kits after every long haul AC flight? Does AC recycle them? Maybe. But SQ decided to do away with it because they feel that their passengers don't value them and many don't.

I'd certainly take SQ over AC anyday.
But when one is paying 14K, they could make a kit available upon request - lip balm, hand cream not used by others and so on...it is not about the value of the kit but the in flight comfort and frankly had I known in advance I would have planned appropriately. As I said, it was my first flight with SQ and my last....not worth the fare premium.
Wings100 is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2014, 8:03 am
  #30  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted by demue
I'm fine overall as it is still in general good or maybe on par or better than other airlines. Basically a bad day on SQ can still be manageable while on other carriers it can be an outright disaster (thinking NA or some European carriers).
My few excursions to the competition in the past 2 to 3 years confirmed to me, that i wont spend my hard earned dollars elsewhere. I'am quite loyal to SQ and even if I moan here and there, in the end I learned over all these years (iam also soon celebrating 20 years on SQ) that they still make difference. The gap has closed certainly.

But, i have a flight on QR coming up shortly, not by choice, but lets wait and see.
SQ325 is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.