An airline without fault?

[anat0l]

There are a lot of comments flying around about QF and their latest demise into removing lots of F cabin, JQing up a few more routes and generally quite a few maintenance and safety incidents occurring.

If you wrote down every rant on QF on a sheet of paper, you could probably make a Burj Khalifa real size replica....


Or could you?

Or for that matter, could you do the same (or much easier) with another airline?

Is there such a thing as the perfect airline, or an airline which has very little to no fault at all? An airline you wouldn't see the media pick up as an easy target, because it just won't work. Or an airline which has very, very, very low levels of complaints.

So far, the airlines that I've seen that seem to have "no fault" include:

• SQ (unless you count all those PPS members)
• EK (except, perhaps, Y cabin)
• NZ
• MH
• CX
• EY
• VA

I'm sure there would be others....


Opinions anyone? What is your 'perfect' airline?

 

[markis10]

Oceanic Airlines seems popular with the Hollywood set.

 

[moa999]

QF/ JQ are easy targets for the Australian press --big headline grabbers - but have a much better reputation overseas.

Just compare the publicity that an incident on QF/JQ to say EK gets.

--

On your perfect airlines list.

SQ - I have had two pretty average experiences in Y.
EK - Could not fault my Y-class TT experience, however had colleagues who flew in their 'old style' non-flat, horribly decorated J and had bad experiences
MH - Are you kidding?
CX - Have you tried their Herringbone J layout... is not good. Also catering quality has gone down, and their regional business (which can be on 4-5hr flights) is pretty poor

Every airline looks good with its new and shiny fleet, but most have some planes 10-20 yrs old somewhere

 

[mannej]

Well, according to some TV show on Channel 7 each week, TT is perfect whilst it is always the passengers fault when things go wrong

Seriously, the subjective nature of this question makes it very hard to find a definitive answer that everyone will agree on.

P.S Proof of the bias towards foreign airlines in AUS is evident by the lack of notable coverage the EK incident compared to a landing gear coming up on a plane that has a red tail on it

 

[medhead]

Umm does underestimating the aircrafts weight/mass by 100t count as a fault, in this context?

 

[tuppaware]

Umm does underestimating the aircrafts weight/mass by 100t count as a fault, in this context?

Only bettered by entering the wrong amount into a flight management system

 

[mannej]

Umm does underestimating the aircrafts weight/mass by 100t count as a fault, in this context?

I think you can (if you delve into things deeper). However my point was the bias shown against certain airlines, which give them an unfounded reputation one way or another.

 

[notzac]

I'm yet to fly on an airline without fault; I'm not sure one exists. I guess it's one of these things where there are a number of different factors (personal experience, expectations, cabin flown, whether or not there was an actual problem) - just to name a few - that will change the impression of a given airline for a given person.

As an example, I've flown 3 sectors with MX and they were all excellent. On time (mostly), friendly staff, great product overall. A+++ would fly again. That being said, having read FT I know there are not a few complaints about their service when something goes wrong - so they're far from perfect in someones' eyes.

 

[ozbeachbabe]

I can't believe how 'teflon coated' SQ are. The airline has had some questionable incidents and accidents notably the crash on takeoff in TPE a while back during monsoonal conditions.

At least 82 people lost their lives however the QF001 incident in BKK with the is much more infamous yet everyone survived.

Wonder how many contras arrive on the desk of sub-editors of the print media and TV networks?

Authorities scapegoat pilots for Singapore Airlines crash in Taiwan

 

[browski]

There is no perfect airline, but there are airlines that genuinely aspire for an excellent flight experience - from booking to luggage collection.

SQ is still at the top of that list; EK also have very high aspirations; and deliver admirably. MH do remarkably well on a far lower budget.

Qantas, BA, AA, LH, JL, et al, do not have "envelope pushing" expectations. They are aspiring for "adequate", and hope that branding and loyalty will do the rest.
Qantas do not wish to be the best, they just do not wish to be the worst; and there is nothing wrong with that.

 

[JohnK]

I do not believe that such an airline exists.

I haven't flown every airline in your list but SQ is far from perfect, from memory NZ was the major reason AN collapsed, CX herringbone layouts (and proably VA) in business class (what were they thinking?).

If the perfect airline did exist then we would all be flying that airline....

 

[anat0l]

probably VA in business class

Nope, VA J is standard straight forward looking.

(what were they thinking?)

Considering VS started it and it's been copied at least 4 times, there must be someone either making good money off a valued concept, or at least 3 suckers, or both.

FWIW like most things in the airline industry, the opinions of the FF (FT/AFF etc.) crowd tend to differ from the remainder of the travelling public.

 

[Keith009]

Considering VS started it and it's been copied at least 4 times, there must be someone either making good money off a valued concept, or at least 3 suckers, or both.

I loved the NZ herringbone seats but didn't really take to the CX ones. Whilst the NZ herringbone seats are identical to VS UC seating (and in fact NZ is paying VS royalties on the Business Premier seats), the CX seats are rather different and far less comfy. A lot narrower for starters. OTOH I do like how you can convert the CX seats to bed mode and vv electronically, whereas NZ's require an FA to manually flip the bed over unless this has changed with the latest cabin refresh.

 

[anat0l]

OTOH I do like how you can convert the CX seats to bed mode and vv electronically, whereas NZ's require an FA to manually flip the bed over unless this has changed with the latest cabin refresh.

You can set up the bed on VS and NZ by yourself; I didn't do this for VS but I did for NZ. The controls and linen are all there for you.

Of course you can always ask the crew to do it for you, but in the case of NZ, I didn't want to wait for the crew. In saying that, they could probably make a bed a bit better and faster than I did

 

[Keith009]

You can set up the bed on VS and NZ by yourself; I didn't do this for VS but I did for NZ. The controls and linen are all there for you.

Of course you can always ask the crew to do it for you, but in the case of NZ, I didn't want to wait for the crew. In saying that, they could probably make a bed a bit better and faster than I did

Far too much effort on NZ. They're supposed to make up the beds on demand anyway whilst I wait patiently with my glass of bubbly.

 

[anat0l]

Far too much effort on NZ. They're supposed to make up the beds on demand anyway whilst I wait patiently with my glass of bubbly.

Well, OK, I never asked for it. I decided I wanted a nap, so after the plates were cleared, I got the equipment myself (stashed of course at the back of the seat), fiddled a bit with the controls, laid out the bed and got in myself.

The crew even later remarked to me of my nap and the way that I made the bed myself. Of course they said I could have asked them and they would have obliged.


You can't wait for bubbly in your seat and have the seat made into a bed at the same time

 

[Keith009]

You can't wait for bubbly in your seat and have the seat made into a bed at the same time

It'd be in the same call bell request. I ask for the bubbly to be topped up first before requesting that the bed be made.