Comfortable Airline?
#1
Original Poster
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Comfortable Airline?
Hi, I am attending a conference in Tuscany next spring and am trying to decide which airline to go with. I've flown on Alitalia before but I was thinking of Air France, though I've never flown them before. Any preferences for airlines to get to Italy? Thanks a bunch.
#5



Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 19,873
Likes: 79
A little more than the others, but in "pure" coach from LAX I'd choose Air New Zealand to London, then anybody to Pisa/Florence. NZ has the best coach legroom between LAX and Europe.
Half a step up is British Airways' World Traveler Plus "premium economy" with lots of legroom and wider seats. Again, from Heathrow to Italy it's your call. Virgin from LA also has a premium coach product.
If you have frequent flyer status with any airline, you can often pre-select exit row seats, which also provide lots more legroom.
LAX to Europe is a long flight, and I'd try to please my knees to the greatest possible extent.
Aside from those alternatives, if you're in plain old coach, then pick 'em. AF from LAX to CDG has been panned a little on some boards, praised on others. CDG is not everyone's cup of tea for transfers, though. As in widely hated, up there with LHR.
Half a step up is British Airways' World Traveler Plus "premium economy" with lots of legroom and wider seats. Again, from Heathrow to Italy it's your call. Virgin from LA also has a premium coach product.
If you have frequent flyer status with any airline, you can often pre-select exit row seats, which also provide lots more legroom.
LAX to Europe is a long flight, and I'd try to please my knees to the greatest possible extent.
Aside from those alternatives, if you're in plain old coach, then pick 'em. AF from LAX to CDG has been panned a little on some boards, praised on others. CDG is not everyone's cup of tea for transfers, though. As in widely hated, up there with LHR.
#7
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,735
Likes: 0
seat Guru .com and find out where your seat is. Remember to check out the kind of airplane you will be on, if it will have several isles, room to stretch. If there is anything that obscures the leg room like media equipment, blah blah blah.
I am on Air France in November, I will tell you how it goes. AA was too high. I am inclined to go with American Airlines more often because they just seem to have more money at the moment. That breaks down to more money to take care of you.
You only have up to go if you have already been on Alitalia. BA is nice but not if you have to stop more often to get to your destination.
I am on Air France in November, I will tell you how it goes. AA was too high. I am inclined to go with American Airlines more often because they just seem to have more money at the moment. That breaks down to more money to take care of you.
You only have up to go if you have already been on Alitalia. BA is nice but not if you have to stop more often to get to your destination.
Trending Topics
#9
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
We flew to Rome on AA in May with a layover in NY (JFK) and the flight from NY to Rome and back was the worst ever. They got rid of their extra leg room (which is why I bought the ticket in the first place for my husband who is over 6ft tall) and we were packed like sardines. It was awful! The seats were so close that I could barely move (I'm not that tall either, 5'5"
especially when the person in front of me reclined their seat. We literally had less than 10 inches between my face and the seat. The flight from NY to LAX wasn't so bad because we had more room for some reason, but I'd think twice about taking that flight again for 9 very long hours.
The airplane was a BOEING 767 300.
Maybe you can pay for the upgrade if your company isn't willing to.
especially when the person in front of me reclined their seat. We literally had less than 10 inches between my face and the seat. The flight from NY to LAX wasn't so bad because we had more room for some reason, but I'd think twice about taking that flight again for 9 very long hours. The airplane was a BOEING 767 300.
Maybe you can pay for the upgrade if your company isn't willing to.
#10
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 965
Likes: 0
We flew coach on American and it wasn't bad at all. On our trip from DFW to London Gatwick we were lucky to get the first row in coach so we had lots of room. On the way back we had regular coach seats and it was fine. American advertises having more leg room and it seems like they deliver on the international route. Of course if you can upgrade to business class that is a no-brainer but my husband and I were on a budget the money doesn't flow endlessly like it might for others.
#11
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,735
Likes: 0
When I go to Hawaii (from east coast) I break up the trip with a stop off in SF. Even if I only have a night at the SF airport and then a morning flight to Hawaii it really breaks up the trip for me. I have no problem with long flights, I just liken them to long car rides. Jet lag is a different issue though for that you need pills LOL.
Its a hop skip and a jump from JFK to most countries in Europe. I have made a few long weekend trips to europe and its frequently a topic in travel articles here. Just to give you a sense of how close we are.
If this is not an option just remember (or pretend you took) long, crowded family drives as a kid.
Its a hop skip and a jump from JFK to most countries in Europe. I have made a few long weekend trips to europe and its frequently a topic in travel articles here. Just to give you a sense of how close we are.
If this is not an option just remember (or pretend you took) long, crowded family drives as a kid.
#13
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 17,268
Likes: 0
There's virtually nothing posters on this board agree on.
But just about the closest you'll get to universal assent is that, unless it's the only alternative to instant painful death, you should never change planes at CDG - especially if you're arriving from outside Schengen and your onward connection is within Schengen. The dissenting views, BTW, are that instant painful death is preferable, and that the two are indistinguishable.
You cannot do this journey on AF without the dread CDG2 plane change, immigration, security and unguided bus tour of the plains of Flanders. So don't do AF. The airline itself isn't nearly as bad as its detractors claim: the CDG Terminal Experience is.
Agree with everyone else about Alitalia. You can't do this through London without changing airports (though summer timetables might be different if you're travelling after the end of March), which rules out BA and Virgin but doesn't necessarily rule out Air NZ, which I once noticed flying LAX-Frankfurt.
So you've got a choice between airlines that do LAX to Frankfurt, Amsterdam or Zurich. Which means NZ (if they're doing it), Lufthansa, KLM, Swiss, and whichever US airlines do those routes.
Transferring at Zurich is slighly easier than Frankfurt or Amsterdam, as you don't have to go through immigration there.
But just about the closest you'll get to universal assent is that, unless it's the only alternative to instant painful death, you should never change planes at CDG - especially if you're arriving from outside Schengen and your onward connection is within Schengen. The dissenting views, BTW, are that instant painful death is preferable, and that the two are indistinguishable.
You cannot do this journey on AF without the dread CDG2 plane change, immigration, security and unguided bus tour of the plains of Flanders. So don't do AF. The airline itself isn't nearly as bad as its detractors claim: the CDG Terminal Experience is.
Agree with everyone else about Alitalia. You can't do this through London without changing airports (though summer timetables might be different if you're travelling after the end of March), which rules out BA and Virgin but doesn't necessarily rule out Air NZ, which I once noticed flying LAX-Frankfurt.
So you've got a choice between airlines that do LAX to Frankfurt, Amsterdam or Zurich. Which means NZ (if they're doing it), Lufthansa, KLM, Swiss, and whichever US airlines do those routes.
Transferring at Zurich is slighly easier than Frankfurt or Amsterdam, as you don't have to go through immigration there.
#14
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,655
Likes: 0
I also receooend Air New Zealand, but just make sure that you buy you connecting ticket as part of your ANZ ticket because that will reserve your rights to missed flights, schedule changes, and most of all, luggage weight restrictions. Your luggae weight allowance is based on your transatantic flight if you buy the ticket together. If you get nust and but 2 separate tickets then you follow 2 sets of rules. If you buy them separately and you miss your connections, you are screwed!
Another LA option is flying on Lufthana which I find to be very reliable and they also have a great on time record. Flights from LA can go either through Munich or Frankfurt. I would pick Munich because it is a brand new terminal and ultra modern and is an all Lufthansa terminal.
Hey, if you fly through Munich, why not take a few days to see the city? Its a great city! Clean, friendly, good food and lots of SHOPPING!
Another LA option is flying on Lufthana which I find to be very reliable and they also have a great on time record. Flights from LA can go either through Munich or Frankfurt. I would pick Munich because it is a brand new terminal and ultra modern and is an all Lufthansa terminal.
Hey, if you fly through Munich, why not take a few days to see the city? Its a great city! Clean, friendly, good food and lots of SHOPPING!
#15
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
It's a little counterintuitive, but WHAT KIND OF PLANE is more important than WHAT AIRLINE. You could be on a great airline with backbreaking seats in a sardine can, while passing up a mediocre airline with dreamy seats on a roomy jet.
Personally, I adore the Boeing 777 and would never fly transatlantic on a 767 again. Note that the 777 is much larger than the 767. Which means more room.
Seatguru is a great place to learn about the different types of planes and how they are configured.
Personally, I adore the Boeing 777 and would never fly transatlantic on a 767 again. Note that the 777 is much larger than the 767. Which means more room.
Seatguru is a great place to learn about the different types of planes and how they are configured.
#16
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
Likes: 0
<b>QC</b>
what does the size of the plane have to do with seat roominess?
There are some domestic Japan Airlines 747s that cram in over 500 passengers.
Till the A380 starts flying the 747 is the biggest plane, yet when you get to fly one of these JL birds, you feel like you are in a sardine can.
Personally I prefer the 2 class AA767-300 to the 3 class AA777-200 (unless I'm sitting in first). The business class seat has more room on the 763. (there are other reasons but it's a whole different discussion).
The size of the plane has NOTHING to do with roominess. Lufthansa has a 737 running between some cities in US and Germany. The entire plane is set up as business class. I believe it has about 50 seats. Usual 737 has anywhere between 120 to 150 seats, depending on the configuration.
what does the size of the plane have to do with seat roominess?
There are some domestic Japan Airlines 747s that cram in over 500 passengers.
Till the A380 starts flying the 747 is the biggest plane, yet when you get to fly one of these JL birds, you feel like you are in a sardine can.
Personally I prefer the 2 class AA767-300 to the 3 class AA777-200 (unless I'm sitting in first). The business class seat has more room on the 763. (there are other reasons but it's a whole different discussion).
The size of the plane has NOTHING to do with roominess. Lufthansa has a 737 running between some cities in US and Germany. The entire plane is set up as business class. I believe it has about 50 seats. Usual 737 has anywhere between 120 to 150 seats, depending on the configuration.
#17

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 35,166
Likes: 0
no, it sure doesn't -- some of the best leg room around now is on the really small local flights (in the US). Those 25-50 seaters have more leg room than the international flights.
I hate 777s myself and prefer not to fly in one if I have a choice. It doesn't have anything to do with roominess, as said -- the airline company decides the configuration and how much they want to jam in.
I hate 777s myself and prefer not to fly in one if I have a choice. It doesn't have anything to do with roominess, as said -- the airline company decides the configuration and how much they want to jam in.
#19
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,793
Likes: 0
P.S. I just remembered that while I had a lot of complaints about outrageous problems with Alitalia in the 1970s, a few years ago (2001, I think), the most comfortable seating I've ever had on a plane was on an alitalia flight. I think I was in one of those seats next to the escape hatch with a lot of extra leg room, andI hadn't even asked for it.

