Question for those that fly Business class

dowie said:
They were/are technically less safe - they've illustrated a blase attitude to risk in flying over an area of conflict in order to shave costs on the route (something other but not all airlines did too).
Click to expand...

This is nonsense, the only airlines that didn't fly over that area before the accident were Korean Air, Asiana and Qantas (and others who didn't fly over it simply because their routes have always been different). The only reason not to fly Malaysian now is the fact they may not exist in the near future.
 
Youstolemyname said:
i just came back from JFK to MAN with American in business class. Seats were very comfy and allowed me to sleep pretty much all the way home. You really want a flat bed not an angled lie flat one if possible, the angle isn't too bad but the true flat one does make a difference. That said, the copious amounts of booze you can consume would enable you to sleep anywhere
Click to expand...

American don't fly to NZ :confused:
 
MichaelAwkward said:
This is nonsense, the only airlines that didn't fly over that area before the accident were Korean Air, Asiana and Qantas (and others who didn't fly over it simply because their routes have always been different). The only reason not to fly Malaysian now is the fact they may not exist in the near future.
Click to expand...

Its not nonsense... they chose to fly over an area where people were actively shooting down planes.

US airlines for example wouldn't fly over that area as they're governed by the FAA which prohibited them from doing so.

British Airways wasn't prohibited from doing so but also didn't citing safety.

The fact an airline would chose to fly there does give you some indication of their attitude towards risk and/or that of their relevant national body.
 
Last edited:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...er-pressure-over-route-avoided-by-others.html
Malaysia Airlines faced intense questions last night over why it was still flying over a known war zone as it emerged other major operators stopped weeks and months ago.

MH17: follow the latest developments

British Airways, easyJet, Qantas, Cathay Pacific and a host of other key players abandoned routes through Ukraine amid safety concerns.

But Malaysia Airlines was one of a number of other operators who persisted in flying across the region despite international warnings, potentially because it was quicker and therefore cheaper. [...]

It is understood BA stopped flying over the region some time ago and easyJet said it took a decision six months ago not to fly through Ukraine.

South Korea's Korean Air and Asiana, Australia's Qantas, Air Berlin and Taiwan's China Airlines said they started avoiding the area up to four months ago, when Russian troops first moved into Crimea.

"We stopped flying over Ukraine because of safety concerns," Asiana spokeswoman Lee Hyo-Min said.

Korean Air said it moved its flight paths 160 miles south of Ukraine “due to the political unrest in the region".

Hong Kong's Cathay Pacific and Pakistan International Airlines said their flight paths had previously changed.

However Eurocontrol, the body responsible for overseeing air traffic control at the EU level, 75 per cent of airlines that used Ukrainian airspace were still doing so prior to Thursday, after which it was closed down completely.

Flight path analysis suggests those included Virgin Atlantic, as well as Singapore Airlines, Air India, Thai Airways, Air China, China Eastern Airways and Vietnam Airlines.
Click to expand...

Sad thing is they weren't alone but the fact still is the warnings were there, it wasn't a completely unforeseen event, some airlines and regulators chose to mitigate the risks but plenty of others sadly didn't.... leading to this one unfortunate event.
 
dowie said:
Its not nonsense... they chose to fly over an area where people were actively shooting down planes.

US airlines for example wouldn't fly over that area as they're governed by the FAA which prohibited them from doing so.

British Airways wasn't prohibited from doing so but also didn't citing safety.

The fact an airline would chose to fly there does give you some indication of their attitude towards risk and/or that of their relevant national body.
Click to expand...

The FAA did not prohibit any US airline from flying over the region of Donetsk until AFTER the accident. Over 60 airlines were operating in the same area as MH17. By your logic, nobody should ever fly with KLM, Lufthansa, Thai Airways, Singapore Airlines, Air India, Air China, China Eastern, Vietnam, Virgin Atlantic, etc etc ever again.

It's pure bad luck that Malaysia has lost two aircraft in such a small space of time, not a reflection of their supposed bad management.

As for BA, don't forget the game they played with the CAA during the volcanic ash closures of 2010. They didn't bother to reroute their planes from Heathrow until it became apparent that they couldn't force their way through airspace closures.

Also, you do realise that a lot of these airlines are now using routes that fly over ISIS-held areas of Iraq? Hardly a peaceful part of the world at the moment.

Please stop fear-mongering.
 
Last edited:
MichaelAwkward said:
The FAA did not prohibit any US airline from flying over the region of Donetsk until AFTER the accident.

By your logic, nobody should ever fly with KLM, Lufthansa, Thai Airways, Singapore Airlines, Air India, Air China, China Eastern, Vietnam, Virgin Atlantic, etc etc ever again.
Click to expand...

No, by my logic those airlines have a less conservative attitude to risk than others.

It's pure bad luck that Malaysia has lost two aircraft in such a small space of time, not a reflection of their supposed bad management.
Click to expand...

Its not pure bad luck - sure chance has played a part too but as has a management decision regarding risk.
 
PMKeates said:
If you had to take a flight today, would you prefer to fly over the Ukraine or not?
Click to expand...

That's besides the point, I'm not saying the airlines were completely fine to fly over the area. Either you criticise ALL the airlines that flew over Donetsk or none of them (in which case you blame the regulators and national authorities). You can't single Malaysian Airlines out because they happened to be unlucky.
 
MichaelAwkward said:
That's besides the point, I'm not saying the airlines were completely fine to fly over the area. Either you criticise ALL the airlines that flew over Donetsk or none of them (in which case you blame the regulators and national authorities). You can't single Malaysian Airlines out because they happened to be unlucky.
Click to expand...
Are we singling them out?
 
MichaelAwkward said:
dowie was/is and the OP has been recommended both Singapore and Malaysian, yet wasn't too sure about them even though Singapore flew exactly the same route at exactly the same time.
Click to expand...

I think you need to re-read the thread - where have I singled them out? I've replied/objected to someone who said they were no less safe but I've also pointed out that other airlines flew that route too.
 
MichaelAwkward said:
That's besides the point, I'm not saying the airlines were completely fine to fly over the area. Either you criticise ALL the airlines that flew over Donetsk or none of them (in which case you blame the regulators and national authorities). You can't single Malaysian Airlines out because they happened to be unlucky.
Click to expand...

No one is... but you also can't claim that they're no less safe than anyone else. Some airlines did chose to not fly those routes.
 
dowie said:
I think you need to re-read the thread - where have I singled them out? I've replied/objected to someone who said they were no less safe but I've also pointed out that other airlines flew that route too.
Click to expand...

You said they were blase about risk and flew over a war region to save costs. That's quite different to stating that they flew a route that many other carriers did, which was deemed safe by all the relevant authorities, and were unlucky enough to suffer a catastrophic accident as a result.

The vast majority of airlines that operate those routes did fly that route perfectly safely. That does not make them all less safe than the handful of airlines that avoided the region for a multitude of reasons (there's speculation that BA avoided the area earlier due to higher insurance costs, not just safety concerns).
 
Last edited:
MichaelAwkward said:
You said they were blase about risk and flew over a war region to save costs. That's quite different to stating that they flew a route that many other carriers did, which was deemed safe by all the relevant authorities, and were unlucky enough to suffer a catastrophic accident as a result.
Click to expand...

It was in reply to a post referring to that particular airline.

It wasn't deemed 'safe' by all relevant authorities - there was a clear risk - checking again the FAA had banned certain areas of Ukraine in April and ref: that area there wasn't an explicit ban but they had advised exercising extreme caution. An area where people are actively shooting down planes isn't 'safe'.

The vast majority of airlines that operate those routes did fly that route perfectly safely.
Click to expand...

no they didn't 75% of them took the same risk
 
dowie said:
It was in reply to a post referring to that particular airline.

It wasn't deemed 'safe' by all relevant authorities - there was a clear risk - checking again the FAA had banned certain areas of Ukraine in April and ref: that area there wasn't an explicit ban but they had advised exercising extreme caution. An area where people are actively shooting down planes isn't 'safe'.



no they didn't 75% of them took the same risk
Click to expand...

The FAA only banned US airlines from operating over the Crimea, same as most other national aviation authorities. 75% is a fairly large majority?
 
Clipsey said:
Something to consider is looking at the seats and will they be super comfy etc. HOWEVER what you are really paying for when you get out of the cattle, is service!!
That is the most important aspect of it, so go with which ever airline deems to have the best service.
Click to expand...

Call me weird but I wouldn't care if I'm completely ignored on the flight. I stump up for comfort. Flew to Melbourne once on economy - never ever again. All I want is a comfortable seat that turns into a flat bed when I'm ready to sleep. They can keep their caviar and champagne :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom