crystalnpat

Going to Italy in September. Trying to decide between flying with British Airways for $716 or Virgin Atlantic for $658. Who would you go with and why?

Thanks.

m_kingdom2

I'd fly BA simply because I get the executive club miles.

Of course, you're asking about service, I believe that the economy on BA has more room and facilities than Virgin, besides which, I cannot stand (Sir) Richard Branson, I'd pay double to avoid having to give any of my money to him.

Blacktie

whew, $58 big ones! lots riding on our answer. tell me about leg room. who's sitting next to you? tell me about the FA uniforms.

Daisy54

Having flown on both (though to London rather than Italy), I liked BA better than Virgin, but being the cheap person I am, I'd go with Virgin and save the difference for spending money. But if the price were equal I'd pick BA.

daph

Just talked to a friend who flew from LA to London in coach on Virgin. She said that the seats only reclined about 2% and that they were so close together that is was absolutely c_____phobic [never can spell that word!]. She said, "Never again".

Dave_

It's six of one, half a dozen of the other if you're in coach - if there's no advantage to you in terms of flight times I'd probably pick Virgin in this instance.

Christina

I have flown both of these airlines transatlantically within the past two years.

The seats recline the normal amount, that isn't true about only reclinng two pct. On some airlines, there are some seats in a back row that won't recline much, maybe that person got one.

There is definitely not more room in BA economy than Virgin. They are about the same -- both are small, about 17" wide seats and 31" pitch, the usual sizes of economy seats now.

I prefer Virgin because I hate BA service, and VA has been having fewer problems with cancelled flights, etc. I'd probably go with best schedule or route -- if that was identical, I'd choose Virgin

KT

Two questions:

How are the connections? Virgin doesn't fly to Italy, so I assume you're flying with a partner.

Do you care about FF miles? You can earn miles on a Virgin flight towards Delta or Continental FF programs. On British's US partner, AA, you can't accrue miles for transatlantic flights via BA, though you can earn credit toward elite status (but only .5 points per mile on a discount economy ticket).

KT

Sorry, I'm an idiot. Virgin Atlantic doesn't fly to Italy, but Virgin does, right?

FauxSteMarie

Faux always flies with the airline with the cheapest fare that she can negotiate on the internet.

They are all equally uncomfortable in coach. You have as good a chance of losing your luggage with one as with another.

Gardyloo

It can very much depend on the equipment. BA's 777s, for example, have an extra inch of pitch in World Traveler; their 747-400s have the new ergonomic seats which, while still tight, may be more comfortable than older seats on Virgin's aging 747-200s.

Another consideration is the connection in London (assume Heathrow). On BA you're likely to land at Terminal 4 (depending on your start city - a few now land at Terminal 1). If you do come into T4 and your connection is out of T1, the transfer between those terminals at Heathrow, especially following a transatlantic, overnight, flight, is a serious pain in the central nervous system. If Virgin's offerings are out of the same terminal at LHR, I'd be inclined to go with them just for the ease of connections.

All that said, I'd still go with American if I had the option, even if it cost slightly more. While they've dropped pushing the "more room throughout coach" feature (as it's not true with their 757s) it is true in most of their fleet, and on long flights it's a blessing.

RufusTFirefly

Since I fly from the east coast of the USA, flight time to Europe isn't that big a deal--I'd save the $60.

Airlawgirl

BA's service is really, much, much improved from what it used to be in the mid 90's and before. Agree totally with M-Kingdom-BA's service is better than Virgin's, in economy, however, if you like to take the cheapest flight over the pond (like me) you'll choose Virgin (I mean, it's not really that long a flight from the US to most points in Europe, is it? Not exactly like those 17 hour transpacific endurance rallys to China and Japan that I just returned from 3 weeks ago!). And I TOTALLY agree about Sir Branson-what an irritating little troll he is! (smile)

minnie17

FYI.
go to seatguru.com to help find the best possible(comfort-wise) seat on either plane.

passantd

I think that both are good! I love BA...just don't fly Al Italia no matter what anyone tells you. They are the poorest excuse for an airline I have ever flown on...and I mean the bottom.

My only complaint about BA is they give you too much stuff for a middle of the night flight. I was going from JFK to Heathrow and it felt like every 15 minutes they were either giving you food, drinks or trying to sell you something.....but the people were real nice and would give you as much as you asked for. On the flip side, if you compare this to Al Italia the people through food at you and not only was it bad food it was a choice of fish or fish....LOL I love fish but picture being closed in a cabin with 500 people eating fish! I think I made my point.


-David

allanc

I very much agree that BA trans-A service is greatly improved. In fact it is one of the airlines that I prefer. However I agree with Gardyloo...check the connecting terminal info. Heathrow, as you may find out, is a very poorly designed airport. Try and get arrival and departure from the same terminal-especially if the connection is tight.

Singletail

"Great improved" does NOT mean that BA service is equal to that on VA...after all, there's nothing quite as bad as "not so bad" If you are concerned at all about being bored during the flight then without question, Virgin, with its absolutely superior entertainment system is where you'd find me.

flanneruk

Both airlines cram you in, but have a sensible attitude to booze. Both generally have better service than the US-based airlines, though service is always only as good as the crew on the day, and I've had mediocre experiences with both (though never a good experience with Virgin in Economy).

You have to change planes at London, and I'm assuming that's LHR.

You have at least to change terminals on any Virgin arrival, as no flights to Italy go from T3.You also fly onwards on a different airline. Virgin don't operate short-haul out of LHR. Transfer is to T1 (bmi) or T2 (alitalia)

You don't have to change terminals if you're on BA from San Francisco or LA. At present, arrivals from most other North American airports are still into T4, so you also need to change terminals on BA from these airports. Since it's all done airside (as long as your bags are checked through), without going through immigration, it really isn't as painful as many posters keep on claiming it is.

Taking BA the whole way is likely to be a lot less messy. Checking in at your US airport, you should at least know one airline is responsible for you the whole way, and they won't be able to blame the other if anything goes wrong.

Since blaming someone else is the very first thing the entire airline industry is taught, I'd go for the option that minimises an airline's ability to do this.

And that means BA.

ilovelabs2003

My husband and I just flew BA Boston to London to Paris in April and the service was EXCELLENT. I am a nervous air traveler, and the treatment I receive from the crew really makes or breaks a flight for me. Friendly staff, good food, excellent entertainment system with individual screens and multiple movie stations with a great selection of movies would make me fly them again in a heartbeat! We even got food on the short hop from London to Paris, unheard of in the US! We also got free mini bottles of Piper Heidseick (sp?) champagne on the way over . . . just the three people in my row . . . must have been leftovers or something! We will be going to England next summer and we will be flying BA again, most definitely!

Mariew

Anything is better than Lufthansa!!