Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

A few positive words about UA's international C

A few positive words about UA's international C

Old May 26, 14, 9:00 pm
  #16  
Moderator: United Airlines; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.85MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Gold
Posts: 49,375
Originally Posted by cfischer View Post
....The hard product sCO is fine, the sUA product is horrible. .....
of course that is a personal opinion. For those that responded in a forum poll it was 49% sCO, 44% sUA, 6% no preference. Not a clear-cut result.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...pmua-pmco.html
WineCountryUA is offline  
Old May 26, 14, 9:04 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Either below the Ockham stack or below the approach to SDKY
Programs: UA 1MM/*G. AA EXP for 1 more year. Then, who knows?
Posts: 5,160
Originally Posted by bmwe92fan View Post
I fly LH often from Tokyo to Frankfurt and I agree with OP here - LH is not as good - at least on this plane (747) and this route.
LH is not as good as UA between NRT and FRA? Don't think a lot of people have the experience to compare them on this route.
Passmethesickbag is offline  
Old May 26, 14, 9:15 pm
  #18  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Potomac MD
Programs: UA MP 1K
Posts: 7,164
Originally Posted by gnaget View Post
You are complaining that they don't have a mass produced brand that has bounced around among the global drinks producers over the last 50 years. LH has gone to the effort to bring in an artisanal single vineyard cognac.

If you didn't like the food then I am sure they could bring you something else. Unlike UA they cater an abundance of main courses.
A matter of taste on cognac. And no they did not offer an abundance of main courses. Choice was asparagus or pasta. Nuked pasta almost always tastes terrible.

And regarding other posts, since I fly from IAD, my international crews are always pmUA.
euslaner is offline  
Old May 26, 14, 9:15 pm
  #19  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 5,821
Originally Posted by Passmethesickbag View Post
LH is not as good as UA between NRT and FRA? Don't think a lot of people have the experience to compare them on this route.
Thank goodness bmw is a contributing member of this community then, right?

I never cease to be amazed by the knowledge and experience FT members bring to the table.
LarkSFO is offline  
Old May 26, 14, 9:46 pm
  #20  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Up in the Air
Programs: UA GS, EK, BA, SQ, CX, Marriot LP
Posts: 4,044
Originally Posted by Passmethesickbag View Post
LH is not as good as UA between NRT and FRA? Don't think a lot of people have the experience to compare them on this route.
Was referring to the product LH offers vs UA on the same plane type as OP - obviously UA doesn't fly this route - if that was the point of your post...
bmwe92fan is offline  
Old May 26, 14, 11:59 pm
  #21  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: SFO
Programs: AA EXP; AS 75K; UA 1K 1MM; Marriott Ambassador; Hilton Diamond (Aspire); Hyatt Explorist
Posts: 43,586
Originally Posted by cfischer View Post
better than LH but we are still talking about bottom of the barral. Delta is much better so is Swiss. Even AZ is better. The hard product sCO is fine, the sUA product is horrible. LH's hard product is poor, even the 748i is not that great IMO but the soft product is much better IMO.
I was unimpressed with LX J. Didn't like the seat - too hard. Food was slightly better than UA. Service was equivalent. Now TK on the other hand . . . .
Kacee is offline  
Old May 27, 14, 12:01 am
  #22  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 9,891
Originally Posted by euslaner View Post
...... And no they did not offer an abundance of main courses. Choice was asparagus or pasta. Nuked pasta almost always tastes terrible.
Choice of three main courses seems to be standard:

cf post # 1491 on this thread

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/lufth...class-100.html
cesco.g is offline  
Old May 27, 14, 12:19 am
  #23  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA 1K MM, Marriott Life Plat, various others of little note
Posts: 2,671
Originally Posted by WineCountryUA View Post
What many here tend to skip over, while UA may not be the best in the premium cabin, it is far better than many.
Sure, LH, along with Ethiopian, Egyptian, Rwandair, Lion Air, etc. It's pretty hard not to be better than somebody given the rogue's gallery out there.
Boghopper is offline  
Old May 27, 14, 12:26 am
  #24  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles / Basel
Posts: 24,804
Originally Posted by Boghopper View Post
Sure, LH, along with Ethiopian, Egyptian, Rwandair, Lion Air, etc. It's pretty hard not to be better than somebody given the rogue's gallery out there.
Better business than SK, TG, OZ, NH, imo...
MatthewLAX is offline  
Old May 27, 14, 12:29 am
  #25  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: variously: PVG, LHR, SEA
Programs: AA ExPlat, UA 1MM Gold, Marriott Prem Plat, IHG Plat, HH Gold
Posts: 1,677
Originally Posted by UA-NYC View Post
6 months ago - but will be on them tomorrow!

Food on my UA EWR-FRA I'm on right now is nothing I haven't seen for 2-4 years now. Same old stuff. And I'm sure none of the wines on the menu will be catered.

I'll take some pics tomorrow on LH and will report back.
I find LH's food to be basically plated Y food (which, to be fair, is much better than UA's Y food), but it's still small portions/not particularly tasty. UA's food is nothing to write home about, but it's usually fairly edible and filling.

The LH FAs I've had in C are hit or miss, same as UA. LH has better alcohol selection. UA has a much better entertainment selection.

The LH old C seat is an embarrassment for a global airline. The new seat is pretty nice, I'd marginally prefer it to UA's seat.

Overall, net/net, I'd say they're about even. To be honest, all of the major TATL carriers are about even in C.

AF/KLM/Delta/UA/AA/LH/BA have about the same seats and service standards. I guess one could try some of the foreign carriers in C for novelty value but I usually just choose the most convenient one now, no point in going out of the way to fly on any of the above.
andrewwm is offline  
Old May 27, 14, 12:40 am
  #26  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: SFO
Programs: AA EXP; AS 75K; UA 1K 1MM; Marriott Ambassador; Hilton Diamond (Aspire); Hyatt Explorist
Posts: 43,586
Originally Posted by MatthewLAX View Post
Better business than SK, TG, OZ, NH, imo...
Better than TG 773/380 or OZ Smartium? Really?

I found TG J on the 380 light years ahead of UA in literally every respect - better seat, better AVOD, nicer cabin, better food, better service.
Kacee is offline  
Old May 27, 14, 1:07 am
  #27  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles / Basel
Posts: 24,804
Originally Posted by Kacee View Post
Better than TG 773/380 or OZ Smartium? Really?

I found TG J on the 380 light years ahead of UA in literally every respect - better seat, better AVOD, nicer cabin, better food, better service.
I find the food downright nasty on TG and though TG/OZ are catching up with the equipment you mention, my own experience (747s on TG/OZ, 340s on TG, SK) was much worse than UA. I flew BKK-LHR on TG on the A340 and found the service to be mediocre, food downright pathetic, IFE horrible, seat even worse. I'll never fly TG business again if I can avoid it...

And on UA, you don't always get great service, especially with the FRA-based FAs I usually deal with, but at least you know you are getting a flat seat and I sleep well in both the PMUA and PMCO seat.
MatthewLAX is offline  
Old May 27, 14, 3:20 am
  #28  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: wandering expat
Posts: 41,061
Originally Posted by MatthewLAX View Post
Just curious how recently you've flown LH C? In my experience, soft product has significantly deteriorated and I agree with the OP--I will take UA over even the 748i.

LH F, though, continues to just blow UA out of the water. There is no comparison, IMO.
A colleague of mine flew LH C recently - both old and new versions. He rates the old C seat as inferior to the UA seat, but really liked his 748 experience.
halls120 is online now  
Old May 27, 14, 3:43 am
  #29  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: yyz/ord
Programs: AC E50 UA1k 2MM AA EXP Royal Ambassador SPG Platinum
Posts: 1,516
Originally Posted by MatthewLAX View Post
I find the food downright nasty on TG and though TG/OZ are catching up with the equipment you mention, my own experience (747s on TG/OZ, 340s on TG, SK) was much worse than UA. I flew BKK-LHR on TG on the A340 and found the service to be mediocre, food downright pathetic, IFE horrible, seat even worse. I'll never fly TG business again if I can avoid it...

And on UA, you don't always get great service, especially with the FRA-based FAs I usually deal with, but at least you know you are getting a flat seat and I sleep well in both the PMUA and PMCO seat.
I read lots of your posts and have to disagree this time. I love the TG 380 and yup the 340 on TG suck seat wise, but? perhaps its because I like the change I love the food service on TG.
the other seat that is worse than UA is Air Canada pods, they are super small, hard seats with poor controls, and the IFE never works. Nick named coffin seats because they are so restrictive.
flybit is offline  
Old May 27, 14, 4:02 am
  #30  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: near to SFO and LHR
Programs: BA Gold, B6 Mosiac, VS, AA, DL (and a legacy UA 2MM)
Posts: 2,055
UA's lie flat seat is great for sleeping. It's at least equivalent to BA's or VS's, which are the ones I've flown recently.

Wish there wasn't a chance of getting stuck in one of the center C seats, but I'll take even one of those for an upgrade anytime!

Sleep is important - especially on the overnights Eastbound to Europe!
StingWest is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: