drewguy

Gotta say several of the responses to the OP seem to be coming from travelers who for various reasons (status, money, OPM) really haven't had to suffer the worse of air travel . . .

SIN-SFO (and vv even worse) is one of the longest flights in the world. But it's still on a plane with relatively cramped coach seats (at least it's not a 777 with 4 across), especially in E-, and are flights that are almost full. I've done that flight in coach a couple of times, fortunately with a bulkhead (and no bassinets!) and it is draining even then. I personally would refuse to book/take such a flight if I were in a middle seat (absent a companion on the aisle, and maybe even then), let alone an E- seat. Yeah, I survived, and while I didn't relish then getting on a TCON for another 5 hours to the east coast, I was certainly ready to be done. And I realize not everyone has a choice or the money to avoid this awfulness, but dismissing OP's plight shouldn't be done unless you've been there too.

moondog

I'm not ashamed to admit that I played the anxiety card about five years ago after a PVG-LAX flight that was supposed to connect to a BOS red eye. I simply explained to a Delta person that I was not up for the second flight, and would appreciate it if she would move me to the 8a flight. Not only did she make the change without hesitation, but she also hooked me up with a room at one of the on-site hotels at a great rate. Btw, I no longer book eastbound transpacs immediately followed by transcons, let alone redeye transcons.

Narrow Seat

Would the typical FLYERTALK Member who did not have the money or status for an upgrade try to make the three-leg 35-hour trip without a long layover/hotel rest stop at a connecting city? Or would they realize their physical, emotional limit and break the trip up?

If you go to any of the large travel websites they are selling many reservations to/from Asia from the USA that last for as long as 60 hours with 3-4 connections without a break long enough to check into a hotel and get some sleep. So people are surviving worse journeys than I did.

In my case, I thought I was in better shape than I was and booked the trip acting like I was still in my twenties. I am in my 60s.

findark

I think it varies widely by individual, but the common thread for a "typical" FTer is that such a member would have a good grasp of what it is like to be on flights like this and be going in eyes-open.

Some people have routines for enduring the misery and want to fly the fewest number of hours possible. Some people chart stopovers or overnight transfers to allow for rest in a hotel, as you suggest. Other people invest dozens of hours into understanding programs and finding fares to travel in a premium cabin, or in better seats, etc. for prices that might be similar to what the average non-FTer pays to fly in Economy. But the unifying thread is everyone knows what to expect when they do fly, as you can see from the undertone of mockery in some of the replies here.

Flying in Economy is quite miserable these days, and personally I would choose "don't fly" if a more comfortable cabin weren't an option. But it's also worth noting that airfare has been getting cheaper year by year, and in some ways it's magical that you can get on a flying machine and go visit the other side of the world in less than 24 hours, all for something like $80 in 1975 dollars each way.

drewguy

Yep - this is the basic choice, assuming premium cabin isn't financially doable. I think once you're past ~24 hours "in transit" it's highly worth trying to figure out a stopover of some sort, which might be just a night in a cheap hotel near the airport or, if doable, a day in a layover city where you can see something worthwhile. In your case (OP's) you had Singapore and San Francisco to do this in, and perhaps in retrospect (or next time) building a stopover in at either of those points (if not both) would have been time/money well spent. Again - not to criticize but more in the spirit of what to do differently next time.

moondog

Unlike most FTers and my non-FT friends who travel a lot, my obsession with premium travel has waned quite a bit as I've progressed through my 20s, 30s, and 40s (in progress). However, I happily pay i[p to avoid circuitous routings and/or break up long trips with nights in good hotels. I can handle economy (not middle seats though) for 12 hour stretches, whether or not I get quality sleep because I always have comfortable accommodation to look forward to upon arrival.

rankourabu

Agree. 40s (in progress) and have no problem with E+.
Everyone has their limits tho.
I doubt I would fly E- middle for that long.

hotscot

I have no issues with babies/toddlers. We all used to be one.
I'll gladly hold a baby while it's owner goes to the john.

northinsouth

I'll bite on this one. In the past year, I've done award trips in economy as I've been traveling a lot for both pleasure and research (I'm a US academic). I'm 50, wife is 62. We both are in Alabama, and we will break the trip up, as time is often on our side in the summer. We've done that SIN>JFK 19 hour monster on SQ, though they only sell premium economy and above. We've done the LAX>SYD route, and have done flights from the South Caucasus/Central Asia to JFK or ATL, using transiting through MUN, IST, or DOH. Neither of us sleep on the plane, and so we deliberately will look for long layovers and stay in a transit hotel. For the LAX>SYD, we got a separate ticket that went to LAX two days before and spent time enjoying LA. We've done 14 hour layovers on the same ticket as well. We've also stopped in places, such as SIN, DOH, and IST that offer stopovers.

The point I'm trying to make--albeit not very well--is that there is no way in hell we could hang on a 35 hour flight in economy (and probably not even in business). We know the risk of separate tickets and put in 2-3 days buffer time in needing to take a position flight out, or we deliberately choose long layovers/stopovers. We always take economy (my work does not allow for business class or above) but know our limits and are aware of the risks we're taking.

It seems to me if you can shoulder the hotel costs, then take longer. It makes the trip less insane and even though we may lose a couple days, it makes the travel more pleasant. My two cents.

rhwbullhead

I haven't done a long transpac since 2017 and that was in E EVA ORD-TPE TPE-MNL. I was happy that the layover was long as I was able to do the transit tour on one leg.

​​​​​​Other than two of those trips, I've mostly flown Spirit and Frontier in the US with longest ORD/MDW-LAS though I did fly PHL-LAS once for my longest flight since the MNL flight. I have status on F9 so those flights aren't that bad as I almost always have had exit rows or 1-3 extra legroom seating.

I flew UA two weeks ago for first time in years ORD-EWR and back. I forgot was first plane was but the return was a 737-800/900 I think. I had a middle E- seat on the trip out there and it wasn't that bad.

Yeah it was a short flight, but the F9 and NK flights make UA E- seem luxurious. The seats are more padded than F9 and the pitch seems huge compared to the NK middle seat I had ORD-MSY. It also felt weird to have a free Diet coke can and a tiny snack. I'm cheap so I won't buy a drink on F9 or NK. Well, I might of for that EWR flight bc I had to run several times to the gate bc of parking lot issues (I missed my first flight but got booked into second flight of the day leaving an hour later). I also have this thing where I won't pay the $3-4 bc I hate feeling like I'm getting ripped off even if $3-4 isn't a big deal for me.

I think I'd still be fine doing E- transpac if I had a window. E- middle seat does seem horrible when I try to imagine it and I think as cheap/thrifty as I am now, I'd try to pay for a better seat if it was 100-150 more. My schedule is flexible so I probably wouldn't book a date where I'm guaranteed a middle seat.

docbert

I've never done that flight. Which I to say that I've flown SIN-SFO or SFO-SIN multiple times since they started that direct flight, but I've always done it via somewhere. Because even though I know I'd be in E+, and even though I know I wouldn't be in a middle seat, I've still made the choice that it's worth the little extra time and/or money to break the flight in somewhere like Tokyo. (In the case of the OP, that even lops 600 miles off the flight, including the connection to ORD).

I do feel for the OP, but if you book a 15+ hour flight, with a short connection to another 4 hour flight, and you don't pay to pick a non-middle seat, then... well... You're likely going to end up spending 20+ hours in a middle seat...

notquiteaff

I used to routinely cross the Atlantic in regular coach when I was younger. UA�s introduction of E+ was a game changer for me. The second game changer was discovering Flyertalk� which introduced me to elite status and ways to actually get one of those big seats upfront (at first occasionally, nowadays more often).

Today I can�t imagine sitting in coach on a flight like SIN-SFO. My body is not allowing that anymore. When my former employer wanted me to fly to India, but wouldn�t pay for business class, I insisted on SFO-FRA, overnight in a hotel, then next day FRA-BLR. That was doable. So definitely consider breaking up your trips in segments, OP.

lincolnjkc

A couple years ago I "wasn't feeling well" but was on my way to spend a weekend with my wife who I hadn't seen in a month so I was going to push through.

I passed out twice at the airport (first while talking to a friend.... Second when they had gone to their office to grab me something to snack on since I hadn't had anything to eat. Airport EMS cleared me* medically and could have made the original flight but I was told by my friend, a lead, and basically every UA employee not actively working a flight that they though it would be a terrible idea for me to go as booked.

They proactively got me space on a later flight up front with a very clear "if you aren't feeling 100% up to it do not feel like you have to go and we will get your ticket refunded" as well an offer to get my wife to me instead of the other way around... Just needed to know what flight to book. After a few hours of rest in the airport and some food was feeling much better and the rest is history but that is one of 3 or 4 specific reasons why United still gets 100% of my flying spend.

One of a handful of very specific and personal ways UA has gone far above and beyond for me

*- While EMS was checking me out there was a 360-degree wall of UA employees around me "Does he work here?" "No...he just flys us...a lot" :-)

Lori_Q

NarrowSeat, I'm sorry to hear United wouldn't bend the rules to let you book a later flight. Perhaps it's best to look at this as a lesson. Now you know your limits, and will consider upgrades or exit rows for future flights.

WineCountryUA

After recent changes, SDC is expensive for non-elites. SDS is their only real option.