LAX 1K

Ok... here is my big question. I have to go from LAX-SIN (and eventually KUL). It looks like I can not get my company to pay "C" fare.. so I am stuck in Coach... and I am not a 1K this year, so I have no systemwide upgrades... so would you prefer UA or SQ from LAX-NRT-SIN???

THanks...

StudentExplorer

Presumably you want to accrue miles? If so, you can't earn miles on the cheapo SQ Y fares. That alone was enough of a reason for me to fly UA last spring to BKK.

I'd think you'd also want to consider your ability to at least get premium seating on UA. You say you are no longer 1K. Assuming you still have status, though, you could at least shoot for an exit row or bulkhead on UA. LAX-NRT is a 777 believe so the chances of getting E+ are slim. Maybe you can route through SFO? I think SFO-NRT is a 744 - at least there you'd have E+.

Guy Betsy

Case in point:

1) UA. 31" pitch in coach. 747 have no individual entertainment system. 777s might have some individual video programmes. Advance seat selection possible.

2)SQ. 32" pitch in coach on 747s. 777s have 34" pitch. Chances are SQ do have fares which can accrue miles. Check with ticketing agent. No advance seat selection possible. But over 30 entertainment possibilities with Krisworld to vie the long flight times away.

3)TG. 34" pitch on the 747s from LAX-BKK.Overnight required in BKK if connecting to BKK. No individual TV. Advance seat selection is good. Chances that fares are lower than the above 2. Food is actually quite good (asian/thai selections) in coach.

4)NH. 32" pitch. Travel must be via NRT.

5)OZ. 32" pitch. Travel via ICN.

All have good fares. Go to any asian travel agency for info.

kt74

If you can get a routing that guarantees E+, can live without in-seat entertainment, and don't mind stupid srrival/departure times to SIN, than UA wins because those extra inches really, really count. E-, however, is a form of water torture on a 20 hour flight.

To connect to KUL without an overnight on SQ, you need the LAX-TPE-SIN, which is a shiny new 777ER at the moment, so the pitch is a little better and the latest entertainment system pretty much guaranteed. No miles on the cheap seats though.

If miles don't matter (and if you're even considering a cheap fare on SQ, then I guess they don't), then MH wins hands down in Y - 34 inches AND state-of-the-art in-seat entertainment. Direct flights and better-than-SQ service are thrown in for free. I think you can also earn miles on NW and KL.

Gaucho100K

SQ. No contest... take SQ.

SQ, SQ and SQ. If you are still in doubt, dont take UA. Forget the mileage issue, you dont want to sit in Y on UA and suffer the prison matron service, do you...?

Did I say you should take SQ...?

B747-437B

I can't believe this is even a question. All else being equal (price, mileage) pick SQ any day of the week. You won't regret it.

zvezda

Most of the lower SQ fares do earn miles -- only the ultra-cheap fares don't. And the experience will be much more pleasant on SQ than UA: better service, better food, better inflight entertainment.

Gaucho100K

I would still take SQ, even if the fare earned 50% mileage.

EmoryFlyer

Just wanted to throw my 2 cents in....got back from a weeklong vacation in Bali a few days ago. Took SQ from LAX-TPE-SIN-DPS and back on their 772 (great plane--shoot for row 58 or 59 on the window-side as these are the last two rows where their are only 2 seats on each side....lots more room and no bathrooms behind you....applies only to the LAX-TPE-SIN flights).

I would shoot for the TPE flight rather than the NRT flight if you can -- more roomy in Y. KrisWorld entertainment was AMAZING...the WISEMEN equipped planes (all flights accept for SIN-DPS had this) allow for on-demand movies and TV programming and you can pause, stop, rewind and fast forward. I've flown on UA international numerous times in the past, and SQ in flight service and entertainment is worlds better. The food on SQ, however, was horrible.

[This message has been edited by EmoryFlyer (edited 07-03-2003).]

Buster CT1K

Have you considered ANA's premium Economy or BA's World Traveller plus? They seem a step up from vanilla economy and are not billed in C.

Chiangi

I also find NH's economy quite good, too!

But SQ, of course, over UA.

When UA used to have those SIN, BKK crew, I still remember I LOOKED FORWARD TO FLYING UA on intra-Asian routes. But no more. I try to keep down my expectations.

Yorkshire Boy

I have flown in Y on both SQ and UA.

Food is good on UA...better on SQ

Entertainment average on UA....SQ awesome as we all know.

Seat pitch will be better if the service is 777 on SQ...i found UA 31" quite tight.

SQ would get my vote even if you could secure a PE seat on UA

LAX 1K

So if you had to choose between Y on SQ/UA compared to Thai in C?? I know Thai has old C seating.,..

YVR Cockroach

Since your final destination is KUL, consider MH. Late last year, I called MH reservations about fares and MH was offering Y class fares (3k r/t!) confirmable into BC at time of booking if space was available. Not sure if they are still offering this.

LAX 1K

Hmm not too bad... oh well.. too many ideas or choices.

I can get SQ earn miles in Y for $1300 RT
I can get UA earn miles in Y for $1850 RT
I can get Thai earn miles in C for $2350 RT

I think my company will make me pick SQ or UA. Just being 6'1" it is tough sometimes. Does SQ have the feet rest that prevent you from stretching out (ala CX??)

Thanks again!