charter vs. scheduled
Mar 17, 2004 | 6:14 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: g,g,g,
Posts: 3
charter vs. scheduled
Greetings everyone,
I am flying from Toronto to Amsterdam for a holiday in June, and am trying to decide which flight to choose from, Here's my choices:
KLM for $1255.CND, Arriving in AMS 7:30AM and Depart AMS at 2:10PM on a 747-400.
or
Air Transat for $800 CND Arriving 6:35AM dep AMS 9:20 Am on an AirBus 310.
Both flights are non-stop.
Is KLM worth $455 more ?
Which Airline and flight would you choose ?
Any comments or input would be much obliged.
Kind regards
OgieO
I am flying from Toronto to Amsterdam for a holiday in June, and am trying to decide which flight to choose from, Here's my choices:
KLM for $1255.CND, Arriving in AMS 7:30AM and Depart AMS at 2:10PM on a 747-400.
or
Air Transat for $800 CND Arriving 6:35AM dep AMS 9:20 Am on an AirBus 310.
Both flights are non-stop.
Is KLM worth $455 more ?
Which Airline and flight would you choose ?
Any comments or input would be much obliged.
Kind regards
OgieO
Mar 17, 2004 | 6:40 pm
#2
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: CLE,OH
Programs: UA 1K 3MM, AA Plat, F9 Elite, the later two thanks to Jeff $, HHdia, Mgold, WynDia, Choicepl, IHGDia
Posts: 1,405
Considering I'ma mileage addict I'd go KLM. The better thing to do is take the charter and spend the extra cash on your vacation.
Mar 17, 2004 | 6:41 pm
#3
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Programs: FB PLT again afater a decade as plebian
Posts: 22,944
TS seating is said to be really tight, and might be 9-abreast on an aircraft that normally is configured at 8 abreast. KL is a little better (at least width wise if not pitch wise).
TS also doesn't have too many backup aircraft while KL has some. A tight schedule in AMS may not work in your favour with TS.
Really all depends on how big a person you are and how valuable your time is in AMS.
TS also doesn't have too many backup aircraft while KL has some. A tight schedule in AMS may not work in your favour with TS.
Really all depends on how big a person you are and how valuable your time is in AMS.
Mar 17, 2004 | 6:50 pm
#4
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 4,024
Air Transat has tight seat pitch.
But considering it's $455 cheaper, I would go for it (and I have made similar analyses myself in the past and flown Air Transat). The worst thing that can happen is that your flight is delayed for a few hours, but that happens on the majors too. So far I've had nothing but good luck on Air Transat (although the breakfasts are quite pathetic, the dinners aren't too bad).
I doubt the miles gained would have a cash value anywhere near $455, unless you are near a threshold.
[This message has been edited by WillTravel (edited Mar 17, 2004).]
But considering it's $455 cheaper, I would go for it (and I have made similar analyses myself in the past and flown Air Transat). The worst thing that can happen is that your flight is delayed for a few hours, but that happens on the majors too. So far I've had nothing but good luck on Air Transat (although the breakfasts are quite pathetic, the dinners aren't too bad).
I doubt the miles gained would have a cash value anywhere near $455, unless you are near a threshold.
[This message has been edited by WillTravel (edited Mar 17, 2004).]
Mar 17, 2004 | 8:44 pm
#5
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: GSP (Greenville, SC)
Programs: DL Gold Medallion; UA Premier Executive; WN sub-CP; AA sub-Gold
Posts: 13,393
Hmmm... three to seven hour layover in AMS, not concerned with the 0 miles earned on a charter, so it must not be an AMS mileage run.
Just going for some good coffee or something?
Just going for some good coffee or something?
Mar 17, 2004 | 8:47 pm
#6
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: between DCA and BWI
Programs: SPG Gold, Hyatt Plat, UA Premier, Hilton Gold
Posts: 3,652
The way I read the message, he is not planing to return on the same day . We FTers are getting too carried way with all the MRs.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by JS:
Hmmm... three to seven hour layover in AMS, not concerned with the 0 miles earned on a charter, so it must not be an AMS mileage run.
Just going for some good coffee or something?</font>
Hmmm... three to seven hour layover in AMS, not concerned with the 0 miles earned on a charter, so it must not be an AMS mileage run.
Just going for some good coffee or something?
</font>
Mar 17, 2004 | 9:49 pm
#7
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: g,g,g,
Posts: 3
Hello,
Thanks very much for sharing your thoughts, I guess I should clarify that I'll be staying in the Nederlands for a month.
Looks like the consensus points to Air Transat.
I'm now leaning much more heavily toward that flight, plus I think I can also reserve an ailse seat(4H) up front on the AB-310. here's the seat plan.
http://www.airtransat.com/images/plan_A310.jpg
I was originally considering KLM for the larger seats (being a restless 6 footer) and the later departure Time from AMS 2:30PM(KLM) vs 9:20AM Yaaawn on Transat.
Great advice all.
Cheers
Ogie
Thanks very much for sharing your thoughts, I guess I should clarify that I'll be staying in the Nederlands for a month.
Looks like the consensus points to Air Transat.
I'm now leaning much more heavily toward that flight, plus I think I can also reserve an ailse seat(4H) up front on the AB-310. here's the seat plan.
http://www.airtransat.com/images/plan_A310.jpg
I was originally considering KLM for the larger seats (being a restless 6 footer) and the later departure Time from AMS 2:30PM(KLM) vs 9:20AM Yaaawn on Transat.
Great advice all.
Cheers
Ogie
Mar 18, 2004 | 12:21 am
#8
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Connecticut
Programs: Delta Platinum Medallion, Crown Room Club Member, United Mileage Plus, HiltonHonors
Posts: 453
Sorry to hear you've gone the Air Transat route. I'd definately pick KLM for both the miles and comfort on a long-haul flight. I wouldn't even consider a charter! Pay the extra bucks is my advice.
Mar 18, 2004 | 1:38 am
#9
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: g,g,g,
Posts: 3
Howdy jmscsc,
I was kinda hoping to hear that, and like a cheap tent, I may just fold on the AT flight for the better quality KLM.
This could be all the excuse I need to justify spending the extra bucks. Hmmmm.
Cheers
Ogie
[This message has been edited by Ogie Ogilthorpe (edited Mar 18, 2004).]
I was kinda hoping to hear that, and like a cheap tent, I may just fold on the AT flight for the better quality KLM.
This could be all the excuse I need to justify spending the extra bucks. Hmmmm.
Cheers
Ogie
[This message has been edited by Ogie Ogilthorpe (edited Mar 18, 2004).]
Mar 18, 2004 | 1:45 am
#10
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 4,024
It really boils down to what your budget is. I'm quite willing to put up with 9 hours or whatever of greater discomfort to save $455, particularly given that coach class is never going to be that comfortable anyway. When traveling by myself to Europe on a budget trip, $455 would have been most of my total budget (lodging, food, attractions) for a week. No way would I spend that in 9 hours (okay, you're traveling both ways, so multiple the journey length by two - still I wouldn't!).
[This message has been edited by WillTravel (edited Mar 18, 2004).]
[This message has been edited by WillTravel (edited Mar 18, 2004).]
Mar 18, 2004 | 8:31 am
#12
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: From and of Boston.
Posts: 4,973
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by WillTravel:
...The worst thing that can happen is that your flight is delayed for a few hours, </font>
...The worst thing that can happen is that your flight is delayed for a few hours, </font>
After an investigation, the Canadian government fined Air Transat for their maintenance procedures which had apparently contributed significantly to the plane running out of fuel.
Mar 18, 2004 | 8:34 am
#13
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Programs: FB PLT again afater a decade as plebian
Posts: 22,944
What you could try is to buy an upgrade to the premium class on TS. Better seat width and legroom than most/all economy seats and I think you'll come out ahead $ wise. It still isn't business class (well, maybe better than the 1st manifestations of).
Mar 18, 2004 | 10:46 am
#14
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 4,024
I said: ...The worst thing that can happen is that your flight is delayed for a few hours ...
wideman replied:
Looks like I failed to enumerate the risks of a crash or mechanical failure. But if desired, here it is:
Fatalities on Air Transat = 0
Fatalities on KLM = ? but several hundred at least. The only disaster I recall offhand was in the late 70s in the Canary Islands, but I know that is not the only one.
Of course KLM has been around a lot longer and flies a lot more than Air Transat, but I don't see a reason to think KLM is safer. If this is really a concern (which it wouldn't be for me), KLM would also be a more visible terrorist target.
[This message has been edited by WillTravel (edited Mar 18, 2004).]
wideman replied:
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
A few summers ago, an Air Transat flight from Toronto to Europe ran out of gas while over the middle of the Atlantic. Fortunately, they were close to the Azores, and, with the engines completely off (because of no fuel), the pilots successfully and safely glided to an airport.
After an investigation, the Canadian government fined Air Transat for their maintenance procedures which had apparently contributed significantly to the plane running out of fuel.</font>
A few summers ago, an Air Transat flight from Toronto to Europe ran out of gas while over the middle of the Atlantic. Fortunately, they were close to the Azores, and, with the engines completely off (because of no fuel), the pilots successfully and safely glided to an airport.
After an investigation, the Canadian government fined Air Transat for their maintenance procedures which had apparently contributed significantly to the plane running out of fuel.</font>
Fatalities on Air Transat = 0
Fatalities on KLM = ? but several hundred at least. The only disaster I recall offhand was in the late 70s in the Canary Islands, but I know that is not the only one.
Of course KLM has been around a lot longer and flies a lot more than Air Transat, but I don't see a reason to think KLM is safer. If this is really a concern (which it wouldn't be for me), KLM would also be a more visible terrorist target.
[This message has been edited by WillTravel (edited Mar 18, 2004).]