I am planning an award trip to Lisbon (from LAX) in a couple week and am examining possible ways to get there:

1. LX (this is what I am currently booked on)
A340 LAX-ZRH in C (ZRH-LIS on TP)

2. AC
LAX-YVR/YYC/YYZ-LHR in C (I would only take a flight with an XM C-Class), (LHR-LIS on TP)

3. TP
LAX-NYC on UA
JFK-LIS in TP C

I have not heard good things about TP C.

---

I really want to take NZ from LAX-LHR but UA blocking prevents me from taking advantage of availability.

I had trouble sleeping in LH C last time and I understand LX C have the same angled-lie flat seats. Therefore, I am leaning toward AC right now, but have heard mixed reviews about their soft product.

What say the experts?

How is OS or SAS in C?

Return will be on SQ to JFK, then UA to LAX. Is SQ 744 really that spectacular (I have never flown on SQ before) or should I take advantage of AC availability on the return to have a true lie-flat seat? Both would be day flights.

Neither have I.

I'd stick with LX:
1) avoid Heathrow
2) avoid TP TATL
3) fly an EU carrier US-Europe, thus under the EU pax protection laws (yes, I know Switzerland isn't in the EU, but they've signed on to the pax rights stuff)

I can second that.

However, a very nice way to get there is LAX-LHR on NZ (fully flat bed, great service) and then TP to LIS.

Believe me I wish I could take NZ, but darn UA won't let me use my miles even though there is space available on the date I want!!!

How does AC's seat compare to NZ's?

Any recent experiences with LX service on LAX-ZRH?

It's quite similar. It's a little bit narrower, but other than that pretty darn good.

I took LX in C from GRU to ZRH -- similar distance from LAX -- and it was a fantastic flight. The service was impeccable, the food was good, and the seats were comfortable. Okay, they are angled and no where near the comfort of the NZ C seats (my favourite C seats in the sky!), but I slept fine. Don't forget to check the Lufthansa forum for the little trick to make them lie-flat...

Another vote for LX for the same reasons posted above.

If you can bag an NZ seat then that's always my first option to/from LAX, you can't go wrong with it.

AC' s new C suite is pretty similar to NZ and Virgin, just a cheaper version but still totally flat and very comfortable, just lacking the quilt, a bit of extra width and extra padding of NZ but to its credit I always sleep like a log on both.

AC is always my first option when travelling back from ORD, I'd transit thru Toronto or Ottowa to LHR rather than use UA direct to LHR from ORD. I love the AC service, the crew are generally much more amiable than UA and even rival some NZ crew plus in their lounges you don't have to buy drinks at the bar, as opposed to UA where you do (plus they have Guiness on tap). I've also travelled on them from Vancouver and Calgary on the 763 services which are great. Just avoid the 330's as they (to the best of my knowledge) are still the old C configuration.

One thing to consider about NZ and AC (and Virgin) is if your travelling alone the herrfingbone layouts are very private but if your with the one you love (or care for a bit) they are not a great enducer of conversation so please bear that in mind.

OK I'm going to be contravertial here but LHR is NOT that bad. I know that may not be the popular opinion but IMHO it's true. I transfer thru LHR from T1 to T1, T2 and T3 just about every week with BD, LH, SAS, TP and AC and rarely experience any issues. You just have to be prepared not to buy duty free liquor in transit as you won't get it thru security.

I personally don't like LH or LX C class on a TATL night flight, especially when compared to AC. However the service on LX & LH in first is fab.

I've only heard terrible reports from colleagues about the longhaul TP service (rates as highly as US) so I wouldn't even think about it if I were you! The short hop from LHR on TP is very bearable though so don't be put off LHR because of the TP connection to LIS, they are plentyful and a only about 2 hours long.

Have a great trip.

LX for simplicity, AC for seat quality on the overnight. Can you do AC there (via AMS, preferably), and LX back?

I am confirmed on SQ on the way back. Any reason to change that to LX (other than to avoid a JFK connection)?


Thanks everyone for your responses above.

Have you flown SQ before? If not, I would definitely stick with them for the experience. Otherwise I might switch to LX just for the longer flight (assuming it's the nonstop to LAX). Nothing beats arriving at your final destination after a longhaul, and not needing to connect.

AC doesn't fly to AMS.

Note that most of AC's A330-300s have not been XM'd. And YVR-LHR is usually served by the A330s. Opt for either YYC/YEG and YYZ/YUL/YOW..

Nope.

It is nice not to connect after a long haul and I have quite a difficult trip home once I reach JFK.

There were no p.s. flights available (except in NY-class) so I am currently on LGA-ORD-DEN-LAX.

LX would be very convenient, but I would like to give SQ a try, especially on day flight.

My dates of travel changed and I am now confirmed on AC on 26 Dec from YVR-LHR. The aircraft is a 767: should I be afraid that they may substitute for an A330 at the last minute? As you stated, most YVR-LHR flights are operated by an A330.