First Class: LH 340-300 vs. UA 767-300?

 

Old Jul 11, 11, 4:56 pm
  #31  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast
Programs: AA CONCIERGE KEY, HILTON DIAMOND
Posts: 8,277
Originally Posted by dinoscool3 View Post
He was talking about the rotation I'm sure.



To the OP, I'd say LH, better lounge, and food.
Yes, thanks dino!
fly747first is offline  
Old Jul 11, 11, 5:03 pm
  #32  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SEA, but up and down the coast a lot
Programs: OneSky Alliance Elite+ with Zirconium and oak leaf cluster, Braniff Unobtainium
Posts: 16,940
And our LH seats and bed were so uncomfortable last week.
Of course, that particular seating arrangement is 747 only, and not on all of the 747s to boot, and there's only one 343 with a similar refreshed F product.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/16622622-post627.html

Sort of like how the UA 777s are these days: airplane lotto.

I would say "assume the old product and be pleasantly surprised if new F shows up".

Thanks for the pictures, BTW.
eponymous_coward is online now  
Old Jul 11, 11, 6:00 pm
  #33  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Crystal City, VA
Programs: United Mileage Plus 1K 2 MM, HHonors Diamond, Hyatt Platinum
Posts: 2,612
Originally Posted by fly747first View Post
While the UA 767 F and C seats both lie entirely flat, in F, the seats are angled sideways... so much so that they require an additional seatbelt which I don't find very comfortable.
But only for a few minutes around take-off and landing. No need to wear the shoulder belt during flight.


I agree with some of the other posters in this thread. There is no one "right" answer for everyone. Both offer something of value, and how that comes out in a personal trade-study depends on what one's priorities are.

I've flown both UA and LH TATL in F. I do find the UA F suite very comfortable for sleeping. LH does a nicer meal service. Certainly the LH FC terminal is fantastic (much better than the tower lounge). If flying east, and upgrading, I would take UA with a confirmed-in-advance NF over a day-of-flight paper-SWU chance; if I don't get into F, the UA C flat-bed is more comfortable to me than the slip-n-slide on LH. But coming west, that might not be such an issue, and I would feel more inclined to chance 'em, to use the IFT. And certainly schedule and non-stop v. many legs will play into it as well. YMMV.
mauiUAflyer is offline  
Old Jul 12, 11, 11:09 am
  #34  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LAX
Posts: 9,032
Originally Posted by eponymous_coward View Post
Of course, that particular seating arrangement is 747 only, and not on all of the 747s to boot, and there's only one 343 with a similar refreshed F product.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/16622622-post627.html

Sort of like how the UA 777s are these days: airplane lotto.

..

Ya, only on LH it's 5 converted out of 60-ish widebodies (47&AB) with F in LH fleet so count your percentages. And the complete process is expected to last another 3-4 years. Good luck!
azepine00 is offline  
Old Jul 12, 11, 11:47 am
  #35  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 20,393
Originally Posted by UA-NYC View Post
You missed the tongue-in-cheek element of my post, thought winking emoticon did it
Oopsie, sorry.
UNITED959 is offline  
Old Jul 12, 11, 1:00 pm
  #36  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SEA, but up and down the coast a lot
Programs: OneSky Alliance Elite+ with Zirconium and oak leaf cluster, Braniff Unobtainium
Posts: 16,940
Originally Posted by azepine00 View Post
Ya, only on LH it's 5 converted out of 60-ish widebodies (47&AB) with F in LH fleet so count your percentages. And the complete process is expected to last another 3-4 years. Good luck!
True. But I don't particularly mind LH old F (I suspect SFO777 doesn't either, after reading his trip reports). It didn't look and sound as "beater" on my A333 recently as UA old 777 F suites I've seen in reports, and a small screen is fine for me. But I could see where someone would want UA new F over LH old F.
eponymous_coward is online now  
Old Jul 13, 11, 3:39 am
  #37  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London; Bangkok; San Diego
Programs: AA ExPlat; UA MM Gold; Marriott Lifetime Platinum Premier Elite
Posts: 8,167
Originally Posted by eponymous_coward View Post
True. But I don't particularly mind LH old F (I suspect SFO777 doesn't either, after reading his trip reports). It didn't look and sound as "beater" on my A333 recently as UA old 777 F suites I've seen in reports, and a small screen is fine for me. But I could see where someone would want UA new F over LH old F.
I don't use the in-flight entertainment so that does not factor into my analysis, but I actually prefer the old UA F-Suite to the new one. The old one had the shelf above where your feet go that I used all the time and I could move the entire seat forward and rest my feet on the foot portion under the shelf with my knees bent. Can't do that in the new suite.
Always Flyin is offline  
Old Jul 16, 11, 11:51 am
  #38  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 4,443
Check it out:

Originally Posted by azepine00 View Post
While I can in some cases agree that LH F is better that UA F, it doesn't come anywhere close to "best first class products in the world".
Check it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52m-b_Pf_ek
SFflyer123 is offline  
Old Jul 16, 11, 1:17 pm
  #39  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New York, London, Sydney
Programs: United GS/2MM, DL*P, VS*G, AA*EXP, Avis CHM, Hertz Platinum, Sixt*D, HH*D, HGP*P, Starwood*P
Posts: 9,714
I really doubt the honesty of anyone who claims they've flown both the old LH first and the new UA first and prefer the LH hard product. The UA hard product wins hand down - more comfortable bed, substantially more privacy (even considering the LH 8-seat 744 config), better IFE, and a reasonable cabin temperature, which you can regulate yourself.

In terms of soft product, there is no question that LH spends more money and puts more thought into its offering. The wines/spirits are always better, caviar service is nice, and you are clearly being served better quality ingredients. That said, it is often hit or miss in terms of tastiness. Still, LH is the clear winner in this category.

Also, no one disputes lounges. But if you're actually flying to get to a destination, rather than sit in an aiport, there is no reason to ever be spending more than 2 hours in a lounge. So, you're comparing 8 hours + of flying with < 2 hours in a lounge - as nice as it may be (and it is - I love the FCT/FCL B in FRA).

For me, whether on a night flight (where sleep is paramount) or a day flight (where IFE is important), UA is the winner. I acknowledge that others who value sleep and IFE less than food and quality of service are correct in voting the other way, but let's not mislead those who do care about a decent night's sleep in a bed/cool cabin.
stevenshev is offline  
Old Jul 16, 11, 2:21 pm
  #40  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Programs: UALifetimePremierGold, Marriott LifetimeTitanium
Posts: 66,140
I'm assuming you're saying the new configured F cabin is cool, and not the temp of the cabin. One of my big pet peeves w/ UA is them keeping the cabin temp too high, which makes it difficult to sleep. Flew 767 Int'l F just a few weeks ago & cabin was too hot. It cools down when they want you to wake up/brekkie, and it's a noticeable difference. Been a pet peeve of mine for years w/ UA.

How does a passenger in UA F regulate the entire cabin temp? Did I miss something? Wouldn't there be fisticuffs btwn passengers when some like it warm & others like it cool?

And hey, you get PJs on LH. I flew LH F on the way back 2 weeks ago. My plane matched the pics farther up in the thread. FCT rocks; 'nuf said.

Speaking only for myself, I'm not going to complain about Int'l F class, regardless of carrier.

Cheers.
SkiAdcock is offline  
Old Jul 16, 11, 3:14 pm
  #41  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles / Basel
Posts: 24,680
Originally Posted by SFflyer123 View Post
Have you flown Swiss First? Or Etihad First?
MatthewLAX is offline  
Old Jul 16, 11, 5:39 pm
  #42  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SEA, but up and down the coast a lot
Programs: OneSky Alliance Elite+ with Zirconium and oak leaf cluster, Braniff Unobtainium
Posts: 16,940
Originally Posted by stevenshev View Post
I really doubt the honesty of anyone who claims they've flown both the old LH first and the new UA first and prefer the LH hard product.
Well, then, let me make an honest statement to you: whatever things others think is sexier about UA F on a 747 than LH F on an A333, I didn't end up really giving a damn about those things when I tried both products, but sure, I could see how someone else might think differently. I don't care if people see me sleeping or eating in a (max) 8 person F cabin. I wasn't impressed with UA's IFE setup compared to, say, Emirates, or even VX RED, and if it's not going to impress me, something arm-mounted is fine if it comes with a far superior soft product and lounge. I didn't find the UA seat more comfortable to sleep in than the LH seat. I didn't find the LH cabin particularly sweltering.

Given that if I want to go to or come from Europe from SEA, UA F is a one-hop, LH F is a nonstop... well, this makes it a no-brainer. It will be LH F out of SEA every chance I can get, instead of going though a hub like IAD, ORD or SFO and risking misconnects, additional flights, and so on.

Speaking only for myself, I'm not going to complain about Int'l F class, regardless of carrier.
I agree. I can see why people do the thing when there's no Dom and caviar, but I haven't reached the rarified level where I can take it all for granted yet. I'll need lots more flights in longhaul F and C to get there, I suppose.
eponymous_coward is online now  
Old Jul 16, 11, 7:09 pm
  #43  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: IAH
Programs: UA 1K, 1MM; IHG Spire; HH Diamond; Marriott Gold (UA); National Executive Elite
Posts: 665
How do these seats (A330 First Class) compare with CO's BF (flatbed) service?

I flew LH old-school business class and wasn't all that impressed.

Last edited by Motorskills; Jul 16, 11 at 7:25 pm
Motorskills is offline  
Old Jul 16, 11, 8:04 pm
  #44  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC (+LHR+HKG+SFO mostly)
Programs: UA GS, DL Plat, SPG Ambassador & Lifetime Plat, Marriott Gold, Hertz Prez, AVIS 1st, Amtrak Select
Posts: 3,170
Originally Posted by Motorskills View Post
How do these seats (A330 First Class) compare with CO's BF (flatbed) service?

I flew LH old-school business class and wasn't all that impressed.
Seat-wise, LH is far behind CO's BF and UA's new J products. Angled, seats first lie-flat mini-suites.
EnvoyBoy is offline  
Old Jul 16, 11, 9:01 pm
  #45  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New York, London, Sydney
Programs: United GS/2MM, DL*P, VS*G, AA*EXP, Avis CHM, Hertz Platinum, Sixt*D, HH*D, HGP*P, Starwood*P
Posts: 9,714
Originally Posted by eponymous_coward View Post
Well, then, let me make an honest statement to you: whatever things others think is sexier about UA F on a 747 than LH F on an A333, I didn't end up really giving a damn about those things when I tried both products, but sure, I could see how someone else might think differently. I don't care if people see me sleeping or eating in a (max) 8 person F cabin. I wasn't impressed with UA's IFE setup compared to, say, Emirates, or even VX RED, and if it's not going to impress me, something arm-mounted is fine if it comes with a far superior soft product and lounge. I didn't find the UA seat more comfortable to sleep in than the LH seat. I didn't find the LH cabin particularly sweltering.

Given that if I want to go to or come from Europe from SEA, UA F is a one-hop, LH F is a nonstop... well, this makes it a no-brainer. It will be LH F out of SEA every chance I can get, instead of going though a hub like IAD, ORD or SFO and risking misconnects, additional flights, and so on.



I agree. I can see why people do the thing when there's no Dom and caviar, but I haven't reached the rarified level where I can take it all for granted yet. I'll need lots more flights in longhaul F and C to get there, I suppose.
Just to confirm, this is a sample set of one on LH? Not calling you out, just saying let's see if you still feel that way after having flown both a number of times. LH first has a huge novelty factor, which UA's definitely doesn't. But for me, at least, in the long-term I've preferred UA.

And while I note your point about non-stop vs. connection, that doesn't really address any of the issues of which is better. Of course non-stop takes the cake, but if you're flying a route where they compete (ORD, IAD, etc.), I hold that UA is materially more comfortable - nothing more.

Originally Posted by SkiAdcock View Post
I'm assuming you're saying the new configured F cabin is cool, and not the temp of the cabin. One of my big pet peeves w/ UA is them keeping the cabin temp too high, which makes it difficult to sleep. Flew 767 Int'l F just a few weeks ago & cabin was too hot. It cools down when they want you to wake up/brekkie, and it's a noticeable difference. Been a pet peeve of mine for years w/ UA.

How does a passenger in UA F regulate the entire cabin temp? Did I miss something? Wouldn't there be fisticuffs btwn passengers when some like it warm & others like it cool?

And hey, you get PJs on LH. I flew LH F on the way back 2 weeks ago. My plane matched the pics farther up in the thread. FCT rocks; 'nuf said.

Speaking only for myself, I'm not going to complain about Int'l F class, regardless of carrier.

Cheers.
Like CO's 757s, UA's 767s have a nasty temperature creep-up problem. That said, LH lacks personal air vents AND keeps temperature set north of 75 more often that not; it's been sweltering on 75%+ of flights I've taken and multiple requests only help 50% of the time; if you're in F on UA and complain, it can get very cold, very quickly.

Last edited by iluv2fly; Jul 16, 11 at 11:46 pm Reason: merge
stevenshev is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread