lyb

The horrors of Continental on a trans altlantic flight? You must have had a bad experience because, I have flown Continental on a trans atlantic flight and it was great, very pleasant and comfortable.

rkkwan

The "horror" is if you're on a single-aisle 757-200, with no empty seats, for long 8-9hr flights like EWR-TXL. If headwinds are strong, TXL->EWR may even have to stop in Gander, Newfoundland, to refuel.

The 752 has no individual screens, crappy audio, and again 3-3 seating with just one aisle. The experience is very different from a CO 767/777 flight.

If it's a shorter flight like somewhere in the UK or Ireland, and if the middle seat is empty, then it's quite OK.

tarocake

rkkwan: if you could elaborate on the Newfoundland bit, that would be great.

I did check the seats on seatguru but I probably wasn't thinking that hard about it. That is pretty crappy to fly 8 hours on an one-aisle plane. The furthest I've flown on an one-aisle plane was from CA to NY but that was on JEtblue with excellent service, good seat pitch and of course the personal TV screens. Unfortunately I think these are non-existent on the Continental flight, which is quite sad when you think about it, especially since the flight is a longer haul.


I'm flying from the West Coast and connecting so my total flight time is actually 12 hours and both ways is on the 757-200 (752). The BA flight is starting to sound a lot nicer even though the times were not as advantageous.

AR

Rex, it has taken me two days to try and work that one out, and no matter how hard I try to find a flaw in your comments - you are quite right!!!

rkkwan

tarocake - TXL-EWR is at the very edge of the performance envelope of the 757. Continental are retrofitting about 14 of them with wingtips, which decreases fuel consumption by about 5%. However, only one plane has been done, and I've read that even this plane with wingtips have had made a fuel stop at Gander, at least once.

Continental can decide to limit passenger and cargo load to make this flight non-stop, if there's a strong headwind over the Atlantic; or they can opt for a fuel stop. Such stop will add about an hour of total flight time. If you're flying to the west coast, you may not be catch the connection and have to overnight in Newark.

Just want to say that my family and I fly Continental all the time, and in general we're very pleased with it. I flew EWR-BRS (Bristol, UK) on the 752 two months ago, and I find the flight very okay, as it's not full (one flight ~30% load, the other ~70%). But I won't recommend anybody flying EWR-TXL in coach, unless that's the only schedule which will fill one's need.

tarocake

Your reply has been very helpful. Just to clarify, does it mean that mostly like the plane will have to stop to refuel? I have a 4 hr layover on my way back.

If this is the case, I'm really upset given that I could have gone on a BA flight (times are slightly better on continental but not worth it if there is a refueling stop and the planes are one-aisle without any seatback entertainment).

rkkwan

tarocake - Sorry to disappoint you, but I'd think that the CO flight is a poor choice for your itinerary. Next time, fly BA or whoever with a wide-body direct from Europe to the West Coast.

I haven't heard too much lately about fuel stops for TXL-EWR. But what you can do is to check the flight status of the flight everyday. It will show the extra stop if there's one on that day's flight.

tarocake

I've definetly learned the hard way. I've flown quite often internationally and have never heard of a one-aisle plane being used for international flights but I guess that's Continental.

I have been checking in the past two days and the flight from TXL to EWR landed in Boston yesterday unexpectedly and continued to JFK (not to EWR) so don't know if it's weather related or fuel related. Anyways, it seems the flights are always late (one by nearly 5 hrs). I guess it's not the end of the world but just upsetting given that my company paid for the ticket and knowing that I had decent alternatives but instead wasted my money on lame Continental airlines.

It's rather disgraceful how horrible the US carriers are compared to the Asian carriers. For example on airlinequality.com, 90%+ of the reviews for Asiana are glowing and positive whereas the reviews for the all the US carriers are generally negative (and that has been my personal experience except for maybe Jetblue and Alaska).

rkkwan

There are good flights and there are bad flights on each airline. As I mentioned, my family and I fly CO all the time, and our experience has been great. But one just has to do some research or ask before booking anything, if you want the best experience.

For example, Cathay Pacific is one of the top two airlines in the world, when you read all the reviews that exist. But in the winter time, many of CX's LAX->HKG flights have to make a fuel stop in Seoul or Taipei, causing the same delay we're talking about here. And many many people complain about poor service at LAX, even if flying First or Business.

Or Virgin Atlantic, which also has a lot of positive reviews. But I had the most uncomfortable flight in my life on one of their old 747-200. And I have flown thousands of times, on dozens of airlines, to close to 100 airports. But that VS flight stands out in my memory as absolutely the worse.

Anyways, Continental Airlines have one of the best business class in the world. And no problem with a long Trans-Atlantic flight in a 757 if you're flying BusinessFirst. Just not coach, unless you know the flight is not full.

tarocake

FYI, I've been checking COntinetal's site and the flights from Newark to Berlin have stopped in Gander on both the 13th and 14th. So just a heads up to folks who are going to buy tickets on Continental that it is true, there is a good chance that the plane will stop at Gander to refuel.

This really sucks on COntinental's part to fly a plane that isn't really capable of covering the distance.

rkkwan

EWR->TXL is always non-stop. It's the return trip TXL-EWR that's trouble.

So far, CO has only one 757-200 with the blended wings retrofitted, and it's not always put on CO96/97. And recent news release has been saying about fuel saving (or range increase) of ~5%, not the 10% in earlier releases.

This is one CO trip I'd highly recommend against flying.