Best Coach Fare Transatlantic Airline Service
Dec 9, 1999, 6:04 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 56
Best Coach Fare Transatlantic Airline Service
All,
I'm going to be flying coach (saving the corp some $'s) and have complete flexibility to fly on any airline I'd like. I was just discussing with a friend that no one seems to rate the travel experience from a coach perspective but "overall." I'll be flying from San Francisco to Amsterdam and have several choices, I'm told: Air France, Swiss Air (via Geneva), KLM, United, Delta, etc.
Can anyone dispense advice on which airlines you like that offer the best "coach fare" service over the atlantic to Europe.
Thanks much!
I'm going to be flying coach (saving the corp some $'s) and have complete flexibility to fly on any airline I'd like. I was just discussing with a friend that no one seems to rate the travel experience from a coach perspective but "overall." I'll be flying from San Francisco to Amsterdam and have several choices, I'm told: Air France, Swiss Air (via Geneva), KLM, United, Delta, etc.
Can anyone dispense advice on which airlines you like that offer the best "coach fare" service over the atlantic to Europe.
Thanks much!
Dec 9, 1999, 7:05 pm
#3
In Memoriam
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: lake forest illinois usa
Posts: 541
Given the choices you cite, Swissair by 2
lengths, then KLM, the rest bringing up the rear. No contest here. See comments about new Swissair seats in current Conde-Nast Traveler magazine. Finally, ask Rudi and then believe him.
lengths, then KLM, the rest bringing up the rear. No contest here. See comments about new Swissair seats in current Conde-Nast Traveler magazine. Finally, ask Rudi and then believe him.
Dec 9, 1999, 11:44 pm
#6
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 56
Great! Thanks for the advice on SR and they're even running a promotion with Mastercard for a free companion ticket from Jan-March next year. Looking forward to experiencing better service and a nicer trip.
Dec 10, 1999, 4:08 am
#7
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Oxford, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,976
Presumably there is no reason why you can't fly BA via LHR? They are pretty good and attentive, if you are short enough not to mind the rather limited legroom. It seems like an easier itinerary than going via Switzerland.
Dec 10, 1999, 11:38 pm
#8
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: London
Programs: BA Gold, ex-BD Gold, SPG Gold, HH Gold
Posts: 2,040
I also recommend SR. While I'm not familiar with KLM's service, CO would also be a good choice, especially if they fly a 777 on the transatlantic leg. AF is inferior to SR, but not bad.
You may also wish to consider the departure/arrival times and lengths of connecting flights for your personal preferences, as for example long transatlantic (SFO-ZRH) with a short connection versus two more equal legs (SFO-EWR-AMS), etc.
You may also wish to consider the departure/arrival times and lengths of connecting flights for your personal preferences, as for example long transatlantic (SFO-ZRH) with a short connection versus two more equal legs (SFO-EWR-AMS), etc.
Dec 10, 1999, 11:56 pm
#9
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: CH-3823 Wengen Switzerland
Programs: miles&more, MileagePlus
Posts: 27,041
SR
even the connection in ZRH is for sure easier than LHR (after a lot of delay-problems in early summer 99).
I don't know about your mileage-account-preferences/thoughts.
(I myself don't fly SR, if I have reasonable alternatives, for personal/family-reasons I explained extensively last year on this board. I would, partly for my *Alliance-ff-program-preferences fly LH who did a pretty good job renewing their eco-seats - but still less legroom than SR).
even the connection in ZRH is for sure easier than LHR (after a lot of delay-problems in early summer 99).
I don't know about your mileage-account-preferences/thoughts.
(I myself don't fly SR, if I have reasonable alternatives, for personal/family-reasons I explained extensively last year on this board. I would, partly for my *Alliance-ff-program-preferences fly LH who did a pretty good job renewing their eco-seats - but still less legroom than SR).
Dec 12, 1999, 7:43 pm
#10
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Columbia, SC, USA
Posts: 32
I didn't check the schedules, but I thing the SR flight from SFO is late so you will get into AMS late in the evening. This may or may not be good for you. Late departures are easier to sleep on, but late arrival in AMS isn't fun.
I flew KLM before. They're ok. Everyone gets a newspaper. They are so surprised if you greet them in Dutch! My spelling is awful, but I think it's "tots ziens" for good bye. They don't have magazines in coach. I flew on an MD-11 SFO-AMS last year. Nonstops are always nice.
I flew KLM before. They're ok. Everyone gets a newspaper. They are so surprised if you greet them in Dutch! My spelling is awful, but I think it's "tots ziens" for good bye. They don't have magazines in coach. I flew on an MD-11 SFO-AMS last year. Nonstops are always nice.
Dec 12, 1999, 8:45 pm
#11
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: New York City
Posts: 3,506
Rudi is right in my opinion - a connection in ZRH would be easier than LHR although I think AMS flights do leave from Terminal Four where your SFO flight would arrive.
------------------
Cheers.
Leo.
------------------
Cheers.
Leo.
Dec 13, 1999, 9:17 am
#12
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Oxford, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,976
I am pretty sure you are right Leroy. It just strikes me as a bit odd to fly 1600 miles out of the way on what is already a 13ish hour flight. Unless of course you like frequent flyer miles 
Dec 14, 1999, 9:35 pm
#15
In Memoriam
Join Date: May 1999
Location: San Francisco UA1K; AA Gold
Posts: 937
Whatever you do, I would avoid (like the plague) an east coast connection: flying non-stop SFO to Europe (even with a connection there) means a 10+ hour flight, long enough to catch a real night's sleep; connecting on the east coast means two 6 hour flights and more jet lag.
But if I were a smoker, I might feel differently.
But if I were a smoker, I might feel differently
.