skrosvik

Yeah!

skrosvik

As of 2008, I would still not consider Aeroflot to be a good airline, hahaha!!!

I think Garuda would be a step in the right direction. I have flown Garuda on several occasions (on MH codeshare), and it have been very good experiences. I have been pleasantly surprised by the great service and courteous staff. The main backdraw is the ban EU implemented a few years ago. I find it quite strange that ST consider a banned airline. Apart from that, I think Garuda would be a nice addition to Skyteam, which lacks coverage in South-East Asia.

I do agree that ST still lacks coverage in large parts of the world such as Middle East and India, but an addition from South-East Asia, where Skyteam is practically non-existant, is a step in the right direction.

Garuda would not be the first 3rd world addtion to ST, but thenagain Star Alliance is adding Egypt Air to their alliance, hahahaha.....

milehighclubnz

Crash on purpose? Wasn't it Silk Air, the subsidiary of Singapore Airlines? The father of a high school classmate of mine was on that flight

milehighclubnz

I think they referred to the Skytrax airlines rating. For Garuda to be a four star (like NZ, EK..) it will take a huge amount of effort

milehighclubnz

Good to see Skyteam is trying to match Star Alliance. I thought Air India was bad enough

jexelot

[QUOTE=skrosvik;10101768]As of 2008, I would still not consider Aeroflot to be a good airline, hahaha!!!
QUOTE]

Have you tried flying with SU? I flew with them 2x in C class and I must say they are far better than any ST member except KE.

azpyre

I believe NW terminated the partnership with Cebu a few years ago due to Cebu degrading to a no-frills carrier. The safety rating only came in this year. Wierd that the website reported as such.

skrosvik

Of course I have, I wouldn't have stressed my point of view if I had never flown with them. I have tried both business class and economy class the recent months - on Illushin, Tupolev and Airbus. And I must say it's not comparable with other ST-airlines. Their business class on their old planes are spacious, but pathetic. Airbus are on par with other ST, but nothing more. The economy class is awful, and on the Tupolev it's so cramped that it must be dangerous. I am just about 1,83 cm tall, and my legs hurts as hell when travelling in coach on the Tupolev 154. On coach you have to pay for every single drop of alcohol, it's complimentary on AF and KLM. I am using SU because of their low fares, and of course full mileage. Besides, SU is not that bad - it's bearable. But, as of 2008, I would still not consider SU to be a good airline!

milesaddict

There is no Good carriers on ST right now.

Just over the average but nothing stunning.

skrosvik

Very true.

typhoon

Disagree 100% I've flown plenty of SkyTeam airlines this year in both Business and Economy, and already passed the Platinum threshold.

Aeroflot have perhaps the best intra-european and domestic business class product around. Once SVO3 opens, they will have a dedicated terminal to match their quality onboard product. I recently flew CDG SVO on SU in economy, and back on AF in Business. The SU economy product was on par with AF business class. Lets not even discuss KL Europe 'select'.

So, you have to pay for wine on SU economy, but at least they serve you hot food, unlike the AF econony rubbish - AF business has a very limited Alcohol range also, even for medium haul flights in Business.

The TU 154's are ageing, but service on short haul flights (Kiev SVO) is good in business, with tasty well presented food options with a choice. On AF, for example there is no choice - take it or leave it attitude.

graraps

Usual anti-Skyteam nonsense...

1) Aeroflot "not a good airline". For goodness sake! SVO obviously happens to be a zoo, but their onboard product is up there with the best. Next time, try SAS or Iberia and you'll forget all about the paid-for wine in Y. Or BA where you'll have your complimentary drinks but not your luggage. Or you can stay within Skyteam and go with AF who seem to only be serving "sucree ou sale" biscuits in most everything below 2.5 hours. SU may not be an extremely outstanding airline that easily makes the global top 5, but they certainly are a good one.

2) "No coverage of SE Asia". Usually people continue this by singing the praises of CX (which obviously is a very good airline, but that's beside the point here) while conveniently ignoring the Skyteam hub that's only 100 miles up the road from HKG.

Do you want to moan about poor coverage of S. America or W. Asia? Fair enough. Skyteam is seriously lacking in these two important regions. The average quality of the products they do offer, however, is not significantly different from the other two alliances (one of which suffers from some more serious coverage gaps).

NickB

I am not 100% sure that these are comparable. The problem with Garuda is not just Garuda itself but the very lack of serious aircraft safety enforcement in Indonesia (it is not just Garuda which is unsafe in Indonesia).

Aeroflot and Tarom were essentially quality of service/systems issues. Garuda is a much more fundamental safety issue.

asnovici

Would you please elaborate how "pathetic" their business class is? Is that their 2+2 seating in Business a.k.a. US domestic First, lumbard support in leather seats with AC ports for your laptops/electronics and inflight enetertainment in the form of individual DigiPlayers? ALL other ST carriers offer 3+3 seating on intra-European, no in-flight enetertainment, no AC outlets. Or is it a choice of 3 hot meals with a printed menu on even short C class flights? What does KLM/AF offer in C again in terms of meals? Did Veuve Cliquot or Mumm Champagne offend you vs. crappy cava on KLM? Yeah, exactly.

On par? SU's Airbus fleet is the newest in ST, all their Airbii aircraft are straight from the factory. Lets take a look at AF Aibii or KLM Boeing planes they fly for intra-Euopean. Do you follow?

Whats exactly is awful about the econonmy class? Leather seats and 32-33 inch pitch (1-2 inches more than KL/AF offering in coach), or the choice of two hot meals in coach? Yep, please elaborate which one seems particularly awful to you and compare to a bag of chips KLM offers in coach or whatever passes for a no-choice meal on AF intra-European flights.

You got me there, 2 Euros for a mini-bottle of alcohol is indeed more then zero on KL/AF, but I don't particularly drink that excessively that 2 Euros per drink on a short Intra-European flight will break my bank. I would much rather fly on brand new Airbus or even aging Tupolev's (whats so dangerous about those, could you please explain?) in a lather seat in coach with choices of hot good quality meals, something that neither AF or KL offer in their coach, but SU does. Not to menton that SU Business blows KL/AF/OK out of the water for intra-European (see above).

Seriously, lets talk facts, not some senseless bashing.

graraps

A serious, determined management can enforce enough self-regulation for this to become a complete non-issue. There are plenty of countries which are plagued by high levels of corruption combined with a loose attitude towards issues like worker safety or road safety (examples: Kenya, Pakistan, Venezuela), but have airlines that most people wouldn't think twice before flying.

I obviously don't know whether GA will benefit from such high-quality management, but I am sure KE and the other ST members would give them serious amounts of help with the process.