|
Originally Posted by dinoscool3
(Post 16742756)
Actually none, we had an option to once, but I begged and pleaded with my parents not to (and my dad hates 747s anyways after a bad flight on a NW one) because of the lack of AVOD on the 12 hour flight, and we ended up going through SIN and HKG on SQ.
Yes, I know this makes me look like a spoiled kid. |
Originally Posted by Luvs2snowbordbut1kSEA
(Post 16743895)
Ah, well you have not lived until you have flown on a 747. Of course, people have their own preferences for planes, I don't know your Dad's issue, but I have gone out of my way to fly the upper deck in C.
|
Originally Posted by Luvs2snowbordbut1kSEA
(Post 16743895)
Ah, well you have not lived until you have flown on a 747. Of course, people have their own preferences for planes, I don't know your Dad's issue, but I have gone out of my way to fly the upper deck in C.
|
Originally Posted by Luvs2snowbordbut1kSEA
(Post 16743895)
Ah, well you have not lived until you have flown on a 747. Of course, people have their own preferences for planes, I don't know your Dad's issue, but I have gone out of my way to fly the upper deck in C.
For me, it's the nose of the 744 that makes it special, particularly if it's F class, but even in C (e.g., BR, AF) it's a differentiated experience. :) |
Originally Posted by colpuck
(Post 16743816)
Without a doubt the new UA F seat cleans the clock of the old LH F, as well as probably old NH F as well. The former based on experience the latter based on seeing pictures of the seat.
. First the food and service is no comparison. Second, you would be surprised at how big a difference the PJ's make on a long flight. Seat on NH F was very good, food was outstanding. If paying your own money there is no comparison between NF F and United F. |
Originally Posted by ijgordon
(Post 16745327)
It's quite interesting how revered the upper deck of a 744 is yet how reviled (by some) a TATL crossing in a 757 can be. There's really very little difference.
|
Originally Posted by ijgordon
(Post 16745327)
It's quite interesting how revered the upper deck of a 744 is yet how reviled (by some) a TATL crossing in a 757 can be. There's really very little difference.
757 was designed for transcons, not TATLs. |
Originally Posted by Luvs2snowbordbut1kSEA
(Post 16743895)
Ah, well you have not lived until you have flown on a 747. Of course, people have their own preferences for planes, I don't know your Dad's issue, but I have gone out of my way to fly the upper deck in C.
|
Originally Posted by UA-NYC
(Post 16746117)
UD of a 747 is a quiet enclave of a large plane designed to cross oceans. You also don't see people from Y wandering upstairs like you would downstairs. :)
757 was designed for transcons, not TATLs. Seems like the upper deck was originally designed for F, but in the 747's of modern age on UA, it's all extended C. Excellent storage space in the side panels and overall I find it to be a much better experience than C downstairs, even if reverse facing on the upper deck as I was today. We even had a few C pax from downstairs up to "tour" the upper deck mid flight. |
Originally Posted by sbm12
(Post 16729826)
With 150+ films covering a broad range of genres, languages and eras they offer a pretty impressive option......
The new system is absolutely competitive with many other carriers in the premium cabins. Definitely not the best, but also not the worst by a long, long way. The old seats and the old IFE suck but they're on the way out. I wouldn't get too hung up on that aspect of things. |
Originally Posted by tuolumne
(Post 16738605)
well as usual you have the "I walked through it on my way off the plane", "saw it on Google images", " heard about it from flyertalk" - crowd deriding united first and calling for it to be dismantled, questioning its viability, and even trying to make it comparable to CO business class. Read:People who have never flown it, and seem to know everything there is to know about it. How exactly you can make sweeping generalized comments using overblown descriptors when you've never even sat in the seat is beyond me.
3-cabin intl. service worked for UA. Their demand base could support it. They made money off of it - and unfortunately smb123's stale argument falls flat the second we realize again that UA invested hundereds of millions not even 4 years ago to retrofit the entire intl. widebody fleet into 3-cabin service - even the 763s. What, did they just do this for show? give me a break. and leave the "conclusions" about the hard product to people who have actually flown the product. The OP may not like it, but for every negative there is a positive one out there. If you want my opinion, it is apologist COmmand who are usually the ones pushing for the ididea of their "glorious, no fault" CO BF product (which is no first class suite by any stretch of the imagination) to be implemented systemeide, to hell with any of the factual ground that UA actually sells those F suits amd makes money off of them. Also, funny how we forgot, in this discussion about how awful and indefensible United First is and how mug CO can "teach" UA in premium cabins, that ee fforget ten years ago, UA was the airline with flat beds.on the front of the aircraft, even sporting (non)advanced video on demand - CO had recliners and nothing more. Now they have flat beds in C and we believe the product is.comparable to a firlrst class suite? Sorry to say, but I strongly disagree. Its also conviniently "forgotten" that what worked for legacy CO, a carrier with two and half hubs flying into many more smaller intl. destinations that could and would never support F inventory, is not the same airline now that UA's more premium-intensive intl. saturation in large markets has been stiched on. Like it or not, F is being kept around because it makes.money, make no mistake. The people who have never sat in an F suite, who rely on others opinions from the "interwebz" are some of the last in any sort of position to describe the product with sweping negative hyperbole, much less call for it to be dismantled. Converted the entire wide body fleet? Except a whole bunch of 777's. As to converting the fuel sucking 763's before the 777's, not sure that was such a brilliant move. You mean all those small destinations like LHR, NRT, HKG, CDG, FRA, PEK, PVG, DEL, BOM, TLV, FCO. Sure there are small cities too, like HAM, OSL, LIS and others, but what's nice is you can take a direct flight there. CO is not the only carrier to have done this, carriers with MUCH more international reach have also. I really believe UA kept International First mostly because of its close ties with LH. As to keeping it at least for the time being, I suspect it's more due to trying to recoup the investment made already. As to making money on F, sure, maybe so, but maybe also more money would be made with more BC seats. BF is not a substitute for international First Class, it's not even close. The problem is, other carriers are raising the bar higher at a rate that is faster than a business-for-profit can keep up. As such, Business Class is where it's really at, the cabin usually sells out on most carriers. BF wasn't developed because CO flies into second tier cities, it was developed because business is pulling back on spending, justifying the cost of a Business Class ticket is more possible than a First Class one for most companies, and becoming more and more so. Even the advent of "premium economy" is a result of corporate policy changes that are allowing fewer and fewer employees to even fly business. It's for these reasons I think demand for F will shrink, not grow. I've been on plenty AF flights were the J cabin is full, but there is not a sole in the F cabin. Paying twice as much for F is a hard sell, and while the UA "suite" is nice, it's not as nice as some others. And no I don't need to fly it to know that. Just as I don't need to drive a Ferrari to know that it's faster than a Focus. |
Disappointed in UA C/F Quality
Just flew another 777 Old Config from ORD to MUC. Was in paid J and inquired about upgrading to F. They said F had checked in full. Fast forward to boarding process. Guess they were oversold and ended up op-upping 6 J passengers that I saw. So they missed out on additional revenue for my seat, all while brushing me off at the gate.. Not sure why.
Anyway, seats were thread bare, for the second time in three flights, the entertainment system didn't work on certain channels. When I ordered my meal, the FA said NO. I said, excuse me. She said, there is no way you're going to get that dish--too much demand. What else do you want? I understand there is only a certain number of each dishes on board, but as a paid J passenger with 1P Status, I thought I had a decent shot at getting my request or at least a more polite response. Overall, I'm disappointed that after, what, 6 years into the Next Gen Business Class, that united has only updated a smidgeon of their 777's. How is this competitive? How do they fill these planes, especially to MUC where the hard and soft products are MUCH better? Only reason I'm flying them is because of a corp contract--I'd switch to AA in a heartbeat if not. |
Originally Posted by transportbiz
(Post 16749684)
,I've been on plenty AF flights were the J cabin is full, but there is not a sole in the F cabin.
|
Originally Posted by jayzee9
(Post 16749788)
Overall, I'm disappointed that after, what, 6 years into the Next Gen Business Class, that united has only updated a smidgeon of their 777's.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...al-cabins.html |
Originally Posted by Yuengling
(Post 16750259)
Slight exaggeration - the first 767 was converted in November 2007
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...al-cabins.html |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 7:20 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.