rrz518

I have the opportunity to choose a similar duration routing on either UAL or Turkish, both 777's. I've never flown on either airlines business class so I was hoping for some advice?

Both flights would be about 10 hours.

Thanks!

docbert

My answer might vary depending on the actual route and any stopovers involved (which clearly there is, as there's no route that both those airlines fly!), but...

I've flown both extensively, and in general I'd take Polaris any day, especially if you're on your own - mainly due to the seat. TK is 2-3-2 where UA is 1-2-1, a more comfortable bed, and much more private.

Food-wise TK probably comes in slightly in-front, but their service has taken a hit over the past few years and isn't as good as it was previously, but in most cases it's still probably a little better than UA.

Service-wise on board both are variable depending on the crew. TK is probably a little ahead, but not as much as many other airlines.

Lounge-wise it really depends on the connection. You'll likely have access to exactly the same lounge at the departure airport (presuming in the US). The TK lounge in IST is excellent,and due to get better in a few months (more on that below...), compared to perhaps LH or similar if you need a stopover with UA.

Other advantages of TK are free internet (which normally works, but not always), and.. umm.. probably some others I'm no thinking of.

Other advantages of UA are the fact that if something goes wrong (cancellation, IROPS, etc), or even if you just want to change flights for some reason, then you probably won't feel like beating someone over the head with your luggage by the time you get it sorted out like you will with TK, plus potentially better RDM/PQM earning.

It you're looking to fly around March/April, then keep a close eye on the opening date for the new Istanbul airport. This is likely to be massively disruptive, so if you're flying around the time it's due to open (still TBD), then I'd 100% recommend UA... If you're far enough after this changeover then you'll get to experience the new airport, plus the new larger TK lounge there.

bostonpilot

Good summary...A couple of points to add based on my flying both as well. This assumes that the UA choice is in new Polaris, not the old 2-4-2 seating.

My general preference is for UA, because:

-New Polaris seat is nicer (the old 2-4-2 isn't)
-in C, 200% PQMs vs 100% on TK
-Flying on UA to Western Europe is usually a substantially shorter trip vs connecting in IST
-PQD spend and lifetime miles credited to UA if you care

But, TK has won out for me a few times recently because:

-C class fares from BOS-EU on TK (and TP as well) have been MUCH cheaper than UA/LH ($10k+ vs $3-4k)
-TK lounge in IST is excellent
-The TK C seat is "good-enough" vs UA/LH when price is taken into account (TP's isn't)

These two reasons are real for me, but may be overly specific:

-RTW C availability for the EU-Asia segments have been much better on TK vs LH/SQ
-Departing from BOS (and other non-EWR/IAD east coast cities) I need to leave mid afternoon on UA to connect EWR/IAD-EU, but the TK departure is at 10:30pm (and LH to MUC at 8:30), so I get a full day of work/family in

minhaoxue

I have taken UA Polaris a few times over the Pacific and just took TK last week in J for the first time. A big plus for Polaris is the 1-2-1 layout. I was at a window seat on TK and had to jump over my neighbor to get out. Also, I found the Polaris seat more comfortable when in the sleeping mode. The TK seat was hard and even with the thin "mattress" they put down, did not help.

Fare wise, TK beats UA. In the end, I would prefer the UA Polaris flight.

UA_Flyer

CIT85

That's why OP should provide more detail on potential routing and timing so that more accurate information can be provide on the aircraft scheduled.

rrz518

Ok, the choices are:

IST - ORD on TK, Sept. 3, or,

IST - BRU (TK) then BRU - ORD on UAL. That's an overnight connection, I believe, departing evening Sept 2, then Sept 3 for the BRU-ORD

whitethunder

Main problem with TK: They keep their cabins at a ridiculously high temperature and they won't turn it down. I've flown TK business three times (all part of one trip and now never again) The temperature combined with no air vents is torture. I would only suggest flying TK if you are OK with a very hot flight, will be wearing shorts and a very thin T-Shirt, and bring a portable USB fan otherwise stick with UA (or AC if available)

UA is the winner in my book, especially if you can sit in the single seating on the window in Polaris.

Kacee

There is absolutely no way I would overnight in BRU on that itinerary for UA over TK. It is not even a close call.

And the UA flight is currently scheduled for 2-4-2 business class, although who knows this far out.

hirohito888

IST-BRU flights are scheduled on A321 with recliner seats. And then the added hassle of overnight in BRU. I would just pick TK IST-ORD for a non-stop lieflat seat.

docbert

That definitely changes my vote. TK without a doubt. The difference is not worth the extra leg, especially with an overnight. Plus that's a day flight, so the bed/etc will likely be less important.

NoTravelIsFree

I was on a TK IST-YYZ earlier this year in business and the service was fabulous. Sure, I prefer more private seats but was travelling with my family and there are advantages to being able to talk to each other (sometimes lol). Some of the best food I've had in the air but you do sometimes have to request a drink. Saying that I had connected from the overnight flight from Male and I was exhausted.

entropy

TK nonstop, not even a question.

BlueZebra

Agree. Would have to have some crazy reason to subject myself to the BRU layover, rather than take the non-stop.

rrz518

I have an "ex" in Brussels - that alone may justify the overnight!

I do agree re the 2-4-2 seating though - not familiar w/UAL enough to say, but the itinerary did say "Polaris"....but I did fly once IAD - SFO on the 2-4-2 and it was quite underwhelming.