Aircraft preferences
Apr 5, 2006 | 10:12 am
#62
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 4
Best Seat Choice?
Originally Posted by Abidjan
Hey, looks like they're 2 of us who actually fly..*gasp*..coach! 
Give me a 777; aesthetically there's nothing like a AA 777, a beautiful sight, especially while crammed in a RJ. ^
Give me a 777; aesthetically there's nothing like a AA 777, a beautiful sight, especially while crammed in a RJ. ^ coach-N fare! I am not versed in fare class codes, but the seating chart is a 2-5-2 configuration. I'm inclined to choose seats 2 rows in back of the front/mid bulkhead. Any suggestions you (or anyone) might have would be greatly appreciated? Flight is DFW/KIK.Thanks in advance for any wisdom you have to share!
Apr 5, 2006 | 12:47 pm
#66
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,236
Since the thread is back, I'll chime in.
One poster mentioned that one should avoid Russian aircraft. Why?
I've had my time on 154s and 96s - they're not bad at all. Sure, the interior may not be on par with some of the better western and Asian carriers but some people are just plain spoiled.
Especially I love the 96's lack of center bins - it makes it feel spacious, REALLY spacious.
I gotta admit, the 86 was a bad plane (boarding through the bottom air strairs WITH the bags, then leaving them down there and then going upstairs to the seat... ugh). Let's hope none of the western carriers get any money-saving ideas like that... self-service bag handling!
One poster mentioned that one should avoid Russian aircraft. Why?
I've had my time on 154s and 96s - they're not bad at all. Sure, the interior may not be on par with some of the better western and Asian carriers but some people are just plain spoiled.
Especially I love the 96's lack of center bins - it makes it feel spacious, REALLY spacious.
I gotta admit, the 86 was a bad plane (boarding through the bottom air strairs WITH the bags, then leaving them down there and then going upstairs to the seat... ugh). Let's hope none of the western carriers get any money-saving ideas like that... self-service bag handling!
Apr 5, 2006 | 12:58 pm
#67
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: AMS
Programs: Flying Blue Gold
Posts: 1,849
Originally Posted by herzmeh
Since the thread is back, I'll chime in.
One poster mentioned that one should avoid Russian aircraft. Why?
I've had my time on 154s and 96s - they're not bad at all. Sure, the interior may not be on par with some of the better western and Asian carriers but some people are just plain spoiled.
Especially I love the 96's lack of center bins - it makes it feel spacious, REALLY spacious.
I gotta admit, the 86 was a bad plane (boarding through the bottom air strairs WITH the bags, then leaving them down there and then going upstairs to the seat... ugh). Let's hope none of the western carriers get any money-saving ideas like that... self-service bag handling!
One poster mentioned that one should avoid Russian aircraft. Why?
I've had my time on 154s and 96s - they're not bad at all. Sure, the interior may not be on par with some of the better western and Asian carriers but some people are just plain spoiled.
Especially I love the 96's lack of center bins - it makes it feel spacious, REALLY spacious.
I gotta admit, the 86 was a bad plane (boarding through the bottom air strairs WITH the bags, then leaving them down there and then going upstairs to the seat... ugh). Let's hope none of the western carriers get any money-saving ideas like that... self-service bag handling!
I would not say there were preferences, but it is nice to have a change of scenery every so often.
Apr 5, 2006 | 1:06 pm
#68
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,236
Originally Posted by bcmatt
I was about to share my sneaky affection for Russian aircraft. I've flown so many I've got rather fond of 154s and 96s - and in a perverse way even the Yak40 on occassion!
I would not say there were preferences, but it is nice to have a change of scenery every so often.
I would not say there were preferences, but it is nice to have a change of scenery every so often.
Apr 5, 2006 | 3:39 pm
#69
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: FLL
Programs: CO, DL, US, Starwood
Posts: 43
Yes, it does matter, but the airlines are always changing their configurations so it is hard to say. Long haul or short haul, nothing beats any first or business class just for the extra leg room alone. Long haul over the Atlantic, I like US Airways A330 Envoy class. I need a 747-4 for a pacific flight. Short haul in coach; Spirit has nice wing exit seats.
Apr 5, 2006 | 3:40 pm
#70
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: FLL
Programs: CO, DL, US, Starwood
Posts: 43
Originally Posted by herzmeh
Well... I'd take Yak 40 over some CRJs........
I'm not crazy about most CRJs either....not sure why, just don't care for them. I always feel cramped. An advisor for CO told me that customers are suppose to feel as if they're on a corporate or private jet when flying on a regional jet...uh, no thanks.
Apr 5, 2006 | 4:50 pm
#71
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi [+MKK4 EBBER R577 EDSEL R577 ELKEY EXERT]
Posts: 15,916
This has become an interesting point of discussion for anyone flying to/from the Islands as once 747s took to the skies between the West Coast and Hawaii, and now you're lucky if you can even get on a 767.
I'm not a big fan of a 757 over the Pacific for such a long flight (or over the Atlantic for that matter), but a 767 is a great aircraft for such flights.
I'm not a big fan of a 757 over the Pacific for such a long flight (or over the Atlantic for that matter), but a 767 is a great aircraft for such flights.
Apr 5, 2006 | 5:45 pm
#72
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 131
Like some others have stated, I believe the defining factor is the aircraft configuration and class of service determined by the individual airline. An older cabin in a 744, although my preferred plane, does not stack up to extra legroom in a premium seating section with IFE
Apr 5, 2006 | 7:08 pm
#73
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: OTP
Programs: PC
Posts: 507
The next time I fly C, I will surely try to do so in a 744 upper-deck, simply because it would be a new experience for me 
But for regular trips in Y, I always prefer the newer jets, like the 777 or the A340...one thing that especially annoys me about the 747s is that (because of their huge mass), take-off is the most shaky out of any planes I've been on, it just feels nasty.
Short-haul, the A319/320/321s are quite comfy for intra-European segments, but it's nice that the Asian carriers like SQ choose to use a widebody jet even for the 2 hour flight from BKK to SIN
But for regular trips in Y, I always prefer the newer jets, like the 777 or the A340...one thing that especially annoys me about the 747s is that (because of their huge mass), take-off is the most shaky out of any planes I've been on, it just feels nasty.
Short-haul, the A319/320/321s are quite comfy for intra-European segments, but it's nice that the Asian carriers like SQ choose to use a widebody jet even for the 2 hour flight from BKK to SIN
Apr 5, 2006 | 8:15 pm
#74
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Live: HVN -- Work: The World
Programs: DL - exPlat (now Gold) ; AB - Gold ; TK - Gold; BMI - exGold; US - exChairman ; UA-ex1K; NW-exGold
Posts: 1,248
DL Domestic : 738
DL Int'l : 772
VS: 346
GF: 332
UA Domestic 322
UA Int'l: 744
EK: 345
Overall I think I like the A346 the best
DL Int'l : 772
VS: 346
GF: 332
UA Domestic 322
UA Int'l: 744
EK: 345
Overall I think I like the A346 the best
Last edited by sefrischling; Apr 6, 2006 at 10:59 am