KLM
Mar 30th, 2008, 05:25 PM
#21
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My daughter's KLM flight today from Marseille to Amsterdam was cancelled because of equipment problems, resulting in a 24-hour delay. The KLM website was inoperative so I couldn't track her flight and when I called Northwest (where I bought the ticket) they told me the flight was on time (this was 1 1/2 hours after scheduled departure time). Add to this a similar 24-hour delay (weather and equipment problem) at the beginning of her 7-day trip, plus a 28-hour delay in getting her checked luggage, and I am feeling quite hostile toward KLM, Northwest, and Air France at the moment--and hoping she gets out tomorrow so she doesn't miss another day of classes.
Mar 31st, 2008, 08:25 AM
#22
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I looked through the more recent report on flyertalk, and you're lucky that KL doesn't cancel its SFO flights often. Beijing, Shanghai, Seoul all the time. For the US, Chicago is most frequent, also one of the JFKs, and then sometimes Atlanta and Houston.
Mar 31st, 2008, 11:56 PM
#24
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have flown the nonstop SFO-AMS flight on KLM quite a few times over the years and never had a single delay or cancellation which I often suffered when flying on US carriers. If you notice, the flyertalk negative posts came mostly from a poster in Jakarta who has a bone to pick with KLM.
Years ago, KLM used to have unimpressive food and service but I have noticed a huge improvement since it was taken over by Air France.
Years ago, KLM used to have unimpressive food and service but I have noticed a huge improvement since it was taken over by Air France.
Apr 1st, 2008, 01:35 AM
#25
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<i>KLM is considered by many to be a top notch airline.</i>
Not by those that fly them. The Flyertalk board for KLM is a pretty dissatisfied group, even for the whine-fest that FT can be at times. Their long-haul coach product is cramped and uncomfortable, with poor IFE options, but decent service. Their World Business Class is nothing special, and not up to the standards of that offered by their cousin, Northwest. I will grant, however, that their intra-European coach product is quite good.
All in all, they are just ok. Probably comparable to Lufthansa coach, but that is kind of scraping the bottom of the barrel, if you ask me. Certainly not top-notch in any regard.
Given your itinerary, why are you so hung-up on the nonstop to Amsterdam? As I see it, you will have to have a stop in at least one direction, unless you want to pay a premium. Since you will be flying back from the UK, wouldn't an itinerary using BA or United or Virgin work just as well, giving one connection and one non-stop? For my money, I would look hard at United and shell out the $349 for Economy Plus access for you and a partner. With two 10+ hour flights, that would be a bargain, in my book.
Not by those that fly them. The Flyertalk board for KLM is a pretty dissatisfied group, even for the whine-fest that FT can be at times. Their long-haul coach product is cramped and uncomfortable, with poor IFE options, but decent service. Their World Business Class is nothing special, and not up to the standards of that offered by their cousin, Northwest. I will grant, however, that their intra-European coach product is quite good.
All in all, they are just ok. Probably comparable to Lufthansa coach, but that is kind of scraping the bottom of the barrel, if you ask me. Certainly not top-notch in any regard.
Given your itinerary, why are you so hung-up on the nonstop to Amsterdam? As I see it, you will have to have a stop in at least one direction, unless you want to pay a premium. Since you will be flying back from the UK, wouldn't an itinerary using BA or United or Virgin work just as well, giving one connection and one non-stop? For my money, I would look hard at United and shell out the $349 for Economy Plus access for you and a partner. With two 10+ hour flights, that would be a bargain, in my book.
Apr 1st, 2008, 03:06 AM
#26
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 6,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>>>All in all, they are just ok. Probably comparable to Lufthansa coach, but that is kind of scraping the bottom of the barrel, if you ask me. Certainly not top-notch in any regard.<<<
When I read such strong judgements, I always wonder about the empirical base.
http://www.airlinequality.com has a ranking methodology which is based on more than 800 criteria and gives Lufthansa 4 stars out of 5 and KLM 3 stars out of 5. I find this pretty appropriate.
"scraping the bottom of the barrel" are the two- and one-star airlines but certainly not Lufthansa which is ranked clearly above average.
BTW, www.airlinequality.com lists only 6 airlines with 5 stars - these are really top-notch (5 of them are Asian).
When I read such strong judgements, I always wonder about the empirical base.
http://www.airlinequality.com has a ranking methodology which is based on more than 800 criteria and gives Lufthansa 4 stars out of 5 and KLM 3 stars out of 5. I find this pretty appropriate.
"scraping the bottom of the barrel" are the two- and one-star airlines but certainly not Lufthansa which is ranked clearly above average.
BTW, www.airlinequality.com lists only 6 airlines with 5 stars - these are really top-notch (5 of them are Asian).
Apr 1st, 2008, 04:55 AM
#27
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue I have with http://www.airlinequality.com is that it is run by a consultancy that works for the airlines themselves. I'm not sure that it is very impartial.
And, frankly, their rating system isn't very useful. They have a huge number of carriers with 3 stars, a single 1-star, a 2-star listing made up almost exclusively of smaller, 3rd world carriers, and only a couple of 5-star carriers. In other words, there is no differentiation among the vast majority of carriers the average traveler would be choosing among.
And, if you want to use the site as a reference point, then I think it useful to dig deeper into the rankings. Assuming that 3-stars is the bare minimum for decent (since 2-stars is the domain of the likes of MIAT Mongolian Airlines), then one should note that KLM has only a single rating above 3-stars for its long-haul coach product, and it is for "Service Efficiency".
They score in the MIAT/2-star range for washroom cleanliness, staff cabin presence, and newspapers. For some reason, personalisation of service and IFE aren't ranked for coach. Doesn't sound like anything better than ok to me.
The rankings for Lufthansa are kind of mysterious. In particular, they get 4-stars for long-haul coach IFE. How? Lufthansa, famously, doesn't even have seat-back TVs in coach. I've heard rumors that they were going to add them, but plans to add a basic IFE system shouldn't earn 4-stars, in my book.
To further invalidate the Skytrax rankings, I offer a few other 3-star airlines:
Alitalia
MyTravel Airways
Spanair
Spirit
Sterling (Oddly still listed as Maersk Air on the website)
ThomsonFly
Transavia
Easyjet
Jetstar Asia
None of these airlines should be confused with even the low standards of Continental or Delta, with whom Skytrax lumps them in at 3-stars.
In short, I think the Skytrax methodology suffers from problems related to choice of scale, survey design, consistent measurement, and integrity of data. They may claim to offer empirical data, but it isn't really worth much.
I stand by my assertion that KLM is no better than "ok" among the major trans-Atlantic carriers in coach. I would lump them in with Lufthansa, just above Alitalia, and slightly below someone like Continental or Delta. They are much further below Northwest and BA, in my opinion.
And, frankly, their rating system isn't very useful. They have a huge number of carriers with 3 stars, a single 1-star, a 2-star listing made up almost exclusively of smaller, 3rd world carriers, and only a couple of 5-star carriers. In other words, there is no differentiation among the vast majority of carriers the average traveler would be choosing among.
And, if you want to use the site as a reference point, then I think it useful to dig deeper into the rankings. Assuming that 3-stars is the bare minimum for decent (since 2-stars is the domain of the likes of MIAT Mongolian Airlines), then one should note that KLM has only a single rating above 3-stars for its long-haul coach product, and it is for "Service Efficiency".
They score in the MIAT/2-star range for washroom cleanliness, staff cabin presence, and newspapers. For some reason, personalisation of service and IFE aren't ranked for coach. Doesn't sound like anything better than ok to me.
The rankings for Lufthansa are kind of mysterious. In particular, they get 4-stars for long-haul coach IFE. How? Lufthansa, famously, doesn't even have seat-back TVs in coach. I've heard rumors that they were going to add them, but plans to add a basic IFE system shouldn't earn 4-stars, in my book.
To further invalidate the Skytrax rankings, I offer a few other 3-star airlines:
Alitalia
MyTravel Airways
Spanair
Spirit
Sterling (Oddly still listed as Maersk Air on the website)
ThomsonFly
Transavia
Easyjet
Jetstar Asia
None of these airlines should be confused with even the low standards of Continental or Delta, with whom Skytrax lumps them in at 3-stars.
In short, I think the Skytrax methodology suffers from problems related to choice of scale, survey design, consistent measurement, and integrity of data. They may claim to offer empirical data, but it isn't really worth much.
I stand by my assertion that KLM is no better than "ok" among the major trans-Atlantic carriers in coach. I would lump them in with Lufthansa, just above Alitalia, and slightly below someone like Continental or Delta. They are much further below Northwest and BA, in my opinion.
Apr 1st, 2008, 05:47 AM
#28
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airlinequality site is very pro-European airlines biased.
There was a time I would recommend the site for airline information but no more.
Anybody that believes what they read there is a fool.
Don't trust their reviews, their ratings or anything else on that useless site.
btw, KLM, a top notch airline? hardly. I would rate them very low when compared to other international airlines.
There was a time I would recommend the site for airline information but no more.
Anybody that believes what they read there is a fool.
Don't trust their reviews, their ratings or anything else on that useless site.
btw, KLM, a top notch airline? hardly. I would rate them very low when compared to other international airlines.
Apr 1st, 2008, 08:42 AM
#29
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TravelGourmet--Last year to Rome we flew United with a three hour connection in Frankfurt to Lufthansa. We missed the connection, and one of our bags was not there when we arrived in Rome. Several years ago we flew to Lisbon on United with a 3 hour connection in London to British Airways. We missed our connection.
When that happens in the summer (when we are taking this trip), there is the added problem of finding a flight that still has seats (for 3 of us) for the second leg.
Anyway, that's the rationale of a nonstop. Which leaves Paris or Amsterdam, since Frankfurt is too far out of the way. I'm willing to pay the extra cost, although more legroom would certainly be appealing....And I would be willing to pay more for Air France to Paris if there would be an appreciable difference in the quality of the airline.
When that happens in the summer (when we are taking this trip), there is the added problem of finding a flight that still has seats (for 3 of us) for the second leg.
Anyway, that's the rationale of a nonstop. Which leaves Paris or Amsterdam, since Frankfurt is too far out of the way. I'm willing to pay the extra cost, although more legroom would certainly be appealing....And I would be willing to pay more for Air France to Paris if there would be an appreciable difference in the quality of the airline.
Apr 1st, 2008, 11:18 PM
#31
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<i>What other European legacy carriers don't block the middle seat in intra-Europe J?</i>
At least among the bigger airlines, I think KLM is alone in this regard, though maybe someone like Spanair does this too? BA does have middle seats, but they use those convertible seats, where 6 seats are spread into 5 and the 3-abreast side is ratcheted apart a little bit, so it isn't quite the same.
All in all, intra-EU J is a pretty bad joke, across the board, and KLM is the lamest I have seen. I mean, there is virtually no difference in the in-flight product between Europe Select and coach. Indeed, the exit rows are more spacious than Europe Select.
<i>And I would be willing to pay more for Air France to Paris if there would be an appreciable difference in the quality of the airline.</i>
I guess it depends upon what you mean by appreciable. You should get an extra inch or so of legroom and the food might be a little better, but it won't be the step up in personal space that something like premium economy would be. I would pay maybe $75 extra for AF, but that would be about it. And I wouldn't do it if it threw your whole itinerary out of whack.
If you do switch it, and need to get from Amsterdam to the UK, I would look into flying, as the train isn't that convenient. VLM Airlines will get you from Amsterdam to London City, which is about as easy as it gets, in terms of flying into London. If you are heading elsewhere, KLM has flights to a lot of smaller airports all over the UK.
My point regarding the connection is that it seems like you will need to make a connection coming back from the UK, since you can't fly the same carrier to Paris/Amsterdam and back from the UK, all non-stop. But, I can see the point that you are more concerned about lost luggage or delays heading into the vacation rather than on the way home.
At least among the bigger airlines, I think KLM is alone in this regard, though maybe someone like Spanair does this too? BA does have middle seats, but they use those convertible seats, where 6 seats are spread into 5 and the 3-abreast side is ratcheted apart a little bit, so it isn't quite the same.
All in all, intra-EU J is a pretty bad joke, across the board, and KLM is the lamest I have seen. I mean, there is virtually no difference in the in-flight product between Europe Select and coach. Indeed, the exit rows are more spacious than Europe Select.
<i>And I would be willing to pay more for Air France to Paris if there would be an appreciable difference in the quality of the airline.</i>
I guess it depends upon what you mean by appreciable. You should get an extra inch or so of legroom and the food might be a little better, but it won't be the step up in personal space that something like premium economy would be. I would pay maybe $75 extra for AF, but that would be about it. And I wouldn't do it if it threw your whole itinerary out of whack.
If you do switch it, and need to get from Amsterdam to the UK, I would look into flying, as the train isn't that convenient. VLM Airlines will get you from Amsterdam to London City, which is about as easy as it gets, in terms of flying into London. If you are heading elsewhere, KLM has flights to a lot of smaller airports all over the UK.
My point regarding the connection is that it seems like you will need to make a connection coming back from the UK, since you can't fly the same carrier to Paris/Amsterdam and back from the UK, all non-stop. But, I can see the point that you are more concerned about lost luggage or delays heading into the vacation rather than on the way home.
Apr 2nd, 2008, 08:40 AM
#32
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Orbitz, Expedia, etc. look like you can book two different airlines for the outbound and return (e.g., KLM and Virgin). I haven't ever actually done that. Any reason (other than cost) not to use one of those online sites?
Apr 2nd, 2008, 08:55 AM
#33
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<i>Any reason (other than cost) not to use one of those online sites?</i>
Not for the most part. The main exceptions I can think of are:
a) You sometimes get caught in a he said/she said game if something goes wrong. KLM might blame Orbitz and Orbitz blames KLM, that sort of thing.
b) Some airlines give you added perks for booking on their site. For instance, you earn 100% Elite Qualifying Miles (EQMs) on cheap Continental fares ONLY if you book on their website. Similarly, Delta is running a promotion offering double EQMs, but only if you book on their site.
That being said, for something like this, I would think that the cost would be the biggest impediment. Flying two separate carriers is often more expensive, since you will basically buy two one-way tickets.
Not for the most part. The main exceptions I can think of are:
a) You sometimes get caught in a he said/she said game if something goes wrong. KLM might blame Orbitz and Orbitz blames KLM, that sort of thing.
b) Some airlines give you added perks for booking on their site. For instance, you earn 100% Elite Qualifying Miles (EQMs) on cheap Continental fares ONLY if you book on their website. Similarly, Delta is running a promotion offering double EQMs, but only if you book on their site.
That being said, for something like this, I would think that the cost would be the biggest impediment. Flying two separate carriers is often more expensive, since you will basically buy two one-way tickets.
Apr 2nd, 2008, 08:57 AM
#34
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, travelgourmet. I think the only difference was we got a nicer snack box and I'm not even too sure about that. It made AF look great in comparison. For the record, I didn't book this flight. I got to experience the joy of KL Europe Select as the result of irrops.
Apr 2nd, 2008, 11:21 AM
#35
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I am a little surprised by what I am seeing here. I fly over 100k miles per year (many years now) and I concentrate my trips via the Delta program...which means alliances with Continental, KLM and Air France as well.
Actually, my preferred order on the above is KLM, AF and then Delta/Continental for international flights. (all get mileage credit in the program).
KLM staff have a very customer oriented slant...unlike the US carriers. They seem professional and also willing to be nice (and also bend some rules sometimes etc.). I would call them professional without being phoney.
Amsterdam is probably the best Europe hub to change at (IMHO beats Frankfurt and LHR easily), so I am happy with them.
The AirFrance/KLM merger produced one of the few PROFITABLE airlines currently operating big international networks.
(Plus they don't charge you for the wine....so I am ok with them).
The comments about bad pitch, frequent cancellations, and lost baggage have not happened to me.
And for things like maintenance and safety, I still feel they are super-serious...this is not a mickeymouse or upstart carrier. They have some tradition.
So within Europe, and also as a departure point for the Middle East, and Far East, they are very high on my list.
BTW I am usually in coach (client pays) so I am not talking about being overly pampered vs others.
For me, the food is fine, the staff is both knowledgeable and professional, and I feel comfortable with them.
And in the event of any problem, I have always gotten either alternate flight or hotel/meal arrangements.
Curious how other high-mileage people rate it recently? (In the last year I have done via AMS to Beijing, Dubai, Munich, Rome and Istanbul from a Europe hub, and all were fine. And I love the fact that the stewards/esses speak at least 2 or 3 languages fluently...)
Just one view, but I travel a lot. Rouss
Actually, my preferred order on the above is KLM, AF and then Delta/Continental for international flights. (all get mileage credit in the program).
KLM staff have a very customer oriented slant...unlike the US carriers. They seem professional and also willing to be nice (and also bend some rules sometimes etc.). I would call them professional without being phoney.
Amsterdam is probably the best Europe hub to change at (IMHO beats Frankfurt and LHR easily), so I am happy with them.
The AirFrance/KLM merger produced one of the few PROFITABLE airlines currently operating big international networks.
(Plus they don't charge you for the wine....so I am ok with them).
The comments about bad pitch, frequent cancellations, and lost baggage have not happened to me.
And for things like maintenance and safety, I still feel they are super-serious...this is not a mickeymouse or upstart carrier. They have some tradition.
So within Europe, and also as a departure point for the Middle East, and Far East, they are very high on my list.
BTW I am usually in coach (client pays) so I am not talking about being overly pampered vs others.
For me, the food is fine, the staff is both knowledgeable and professional, and I feel comfortable with them.
And in the event of any problem, I have always gotten either alternate flight or hotel/meal arrangements.
Curious how other high-mileage people rate it recently? (In the last year I have done via AMS to Beijing, Dubai, Munich, Rome and Istanbul from a Europe hub, and all were fine. And I love the fact that the stewards/esses speak at least 2 or 3 languages fluently...)
Just one view, but I travel a lot. Rouss
Apr 2nd, 2008, 11:36 AM
#36
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For very many years I have flown to Athens from the UK using BA, Olympic, Virgin, easyJet and KLM.
For the last 6 years I have flown only KLM via Schipol. When with them I have arrived and departed on time, found the service professional and courteous and connecting at Amsterdam is so easy.
In the past and on that route I've suffered almost constant delays with the other airlines I chose, particularly BA. I'm convinced KLM must pay more to the Athens airport authority to keep to its timetable!
Bill
For the last 6 years I have flown only KLM via Schipol. When with them I have arrived and departed on time, found the service professional and courteous and connecting at Amsterdam is so easy.
In the past and on that route I've suffered almost constant delays with the other airlines I chose, particularly BA. I'm convinced KLM must pay more to the Athens airport authority to keep to its timetable!
Bill
Apr 2nd, 2008, 11:55 AM
#37
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure what cabin we're comparing among KL/AF/DL/CO. I only have recent experience in business and not on CO, but my preference would be AF (now that all aircraft have been reconfigured), DL and KL. KL scores lowest mainly because of their uncomfortable (to me) seats and as I recently experienced, they have one of the worst intra-Europe J products with almost no differentiation between J and Y. No doubt AMS is far better for transferring even with the recent improvements to CDG (opening of S3 and re-opening of 2E) although I could do without the smoking in the KL Crown lounges (my understanding is that even though Schiphol is now smoke free, the lounges won't be smoke free until the wider smoking ban goes into effect in the Netherlands on July 1st). For on board service I prefer DL, KL and AF in that order.
Knock on wood I haven't had any problems with cancellations and my luggage has been stranded by both AF in CDG and KL in AMS but almost always because I had short connections or other unusual instances where I fully expected my luggage to be delayed so I don't place blame anywhere and their 100 EUR delayed baggage allowance is rather generous compared to US carriers.
As far as ground service, I've been lucky not to have had too many issues and a recent minor one was taken care of by KL AMS ground staff just fine. AF CDG ground staff were exemplary (OK they didn't meet me at the gate as I requested but I didn't really expect it) with a recent problem which surprised me as I'd always heard so many negatives about CDG ground staff. DL ground staff I've always found willing to help.
Food and entertainment I don't so much care about but I guess I'd give DL a slight nod over KL/AF in the catering dept, but also I notice the catering quality varies depending on where I'm originating so it's hard to really compare. KL however does win in one category with their AVOD choice when available but the others are catching up.
Just my 2 cents.
Knock on wood I haven't had any problems with cancellations and my luggage has been stranded by both AF in CDG and KL in AMS but almost always because I had short connections or other unusual instances where I fully expected my luggage to be delayed so I don't place blame anywhere and their 100 EUR delayed baggage allowance is rather generous compared to US carriers.
As far as ground service, I've been lucky not to have had too many issues and a recent minor one was taken care of by KL AMS ground staff just fine. AF CDG ground staff were exemplary (OK they didn't meet me at the gate as I requested but I didn't really expect it) with a recent problem which surprised me as I'd always heard so many negatives about CDG ground staff. DL ground staff I've always found willing to help.
Food and entertainment I don't so much care about but I guess I'd give DL a slight nod over KL/AF in the catering dept, but also I notice the catering quality varies depending on where I'm originating so it's hard to really compare. KL however does win in one category with their AVOD choice when available but the others are catching up.
Just my 2 cents.
Apr 2nd, 2008, 12:17 PM
#38
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now that I think about it, I actually think overall catering quality in J has declined in recent years on KL. And for the longest time, non-Flying Blue Platinum business class passengers couldn't use the showers in the KL AMS lounges whereas this was never an issue in the AF CDG or DL ATL/JFK (I don't think there are showers at CVG) lounges.
Apr 2nd, 2008, 12:34 PM
#39
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here are the <b>longhauls</b> cancellations in the last 2 months (I'm only counting the outbounds from AMS due to lack of aircrafts, which automatically include the inbounds to AMS. There are other canceled flights like 4/1 IAH-AMS after the 744 broke down in IAH, or 3/26 LAX-AMS, another 744):
Longhauls meaning to Far East, South Asia and Americas; I'm not including the medium hauls to middle east, Central Asia and northern Africa.
ICN: 3/31, 3/17, 3/10, 3/3, 2/25, 2/18, 2/11, 2/4
PVG: 3/31, 3/30, 2/16, 2/14, 2/12, 2/10, 2/9, 2/7
ORD: 3/29, 2/26, 2/21
NRT: 3/28, 2/2
JFK: 3/27, 3/7, 2/29
KIX: 3/25, 2/2
HKG: 3/14, 2/12, 2/10, 2/3
IAD: 3/12, 3/11
PEK: 3/10, 3/9, 2/26, 2/24, 2/17, 2/15, 2/13, 2/11, 2/9, 2/6
YYZ: 3/9
HYD: 2/19
GRU: 3/8
ATL: 3/8, 3/1
CUR: 2/25
CTU: 2/10
So, not only do they have to cancel due to aircraft maintenance, but they also cut flights to China during Chinese New Year because of low load.
As for seatings, KL just received their second 777-300ER. They have more on order. They are the only major airline that have 3-4-3 seating on these planes without extra legroom for longhauls. China Southern is the other.
[ANA does it only for domestic; Emirates have extra legroom; KL's corporate sister AF only do that for CIO flights for their Caribbean and Indian Ocean subfleet.]
KL is using them for regular longhauls.
Longhauls meaning to Far East, South Asia and Americas; I'm not including the medium hauls to middle east, Central Asia and northern Africa.
ICN: 3/31, 3/17, 3/10, 3/3, 2/25, 2/18, 2/11, 2/4
PVG: 3/31, 3/30, 2/16, 2/14, 2/12, 2/10, 2/9, 2/7
ORD: 3/29, 2/26, 2/21
NRT: 3/28, 2/2
JFK: 3/27, 3/7, 2/29
KIX: 3/25, 2/2
HKG: 3/14, 2/12, 2/10, 2/3
IAD: 3/12, 3/11
PEK: 3/10, 3/9, 2/26, 2/24, 2/17, 2/15, 2/13, 2/11, 2/9, 2/6
YYZ: 3/9
HYD: 2/19
GRU: 3/8
ATL: 3/8, 3/1
CUR: 2/25
CTU: 2/10
So, not only do they have to cancel due to aircraft maintenance, but they also cut flights to China during Chinese New Year because of low load.
As for seatings, KL just received their second 777-300ER. They have more on order. They are the only major airline that have 3-4-3 seating on these planes without extra legroom for longhauls. China Southern is the other.
[ANA does it only for domestic; Emirates have extra legroom; KL's corporate sister AF only do that for CIO flights for their Caribbean and Indian Ocean subfleet.]
KL is using them for regular longhauls.
Apr 2nd, 2008, 01:54 PM
#40
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<i>Curious how other high-mileage people rate it recently?</i>
Well, I did close to 100k miles last year, across quite a few carriers, and I rate them just ok. Like I have said, I think their intra-European coach product is quite good. Their intra-European biz product is pathetic. Their long-haul coach product is undone by too many 747s and MD-11s showing their age, poor seat pitch, unreliable Asian schedules, and bad food. And their World Business Class gets a C- for long-haul J.
For reference, I have flown Northwest, Continental, Air France, BA, and Swiss in long-haul biz, within the past year or so. All were better than KLM, except for Swiss, which was undone by the abomination that they call a biz seat on the A330. Too bad, because the rest of the Swiss experience gets an A+.
In long-haul coach, I have flown Northwest, Delta, Continental, Lufthansa, and BA. All were better than KLM, except Lufthansa. Northwest takes first place by a wide margin, but I admit that I have always sat in an exit row on the A330, which is a pretty amazing seat, with unlimited legroom, power ports, and AVOD. Delta was solid, though the IFE is really poor. Continental was professional, but tight. BA was very nice, but again, having Elite Status makes a world of difference on BA, so I am probably biased. KLM suffered from awful seating.
For short-haul coach, I have flown SAS, Sterling, Delta, Continental, Northwest, Spanair, VLM, BA, and Alitalia. KLM does well here. Only BA and VLM compete. Comfortable seats. Great service. Clean planes. Really a top-notch product.
I may be a little over the top in my anti-KLM attitude, but I like to think I have a decent amount of experience upon which to base my opinion.
Well, I did close to 100k miles last year, across quite a few carriers, and I rate them just ok. Like I have said, I think their intra-European coach product is quite good. Their intra-European biz product is pathetic. Their long-haul coach product is undone by too many 747s and MD-11s showing their age, poor seat pitch, unreliable Asian schedules, and bad food. And their World Business Class gets a C- for long-haul J.
For reference, I have flown Northwest, Continental, Air France, BA, and Swiss in long-haul biz, within the past year or so. All were better than KLM, except for Swiss, which was undone by the abomination that they call a biz seat on the A330. Too bad, because the rest of the Swiss experience gets an A+.
In long-haul coach, I have flown Northwest, Delta, Continental, Lufthansa, and BA. All were better than KLM, except Lufthansa. Northwest takes first place by a wide margin, but I admit that I have always sat in an exit row on the A330, which is a pretty amazing seat, with unlimited legroom, power ports, and AVOD. Delta was solid, though the IFE is really poor. Continental was professional, but tight. BA was very nice, but again, having Elite Status makes a world of difference on BA, so I am probably biased. KLM suffered from awful seating.
For short-haul coach, I have flown SAS, Sterling, Delta, Continental, Northwest, Spanair, VLM, BA, and Alitalia. KLM does well here. Only BA and VLM compete. Comfortable seats. Great service. Clean planes. Really a top-notch product.
I may be a little over the top in my anti-KLM attitude, but I like to think I have a decent amount of experience upon which to base my opinion.
