Air France or Iberia
F
I have the choice of Air France or Iberia.
Is either one or the other significantly better in terms of customer
service, age of aircraft or any other area?
TIA
--
F
Irwell
Iberia is Spanish, Air France lost a plane taking
off from Rio.
Jeff Hacker
schedules. Both AF and IB fly essentially similar fleets.
"F" <news@nowhere> wrote in message
news:7budnf877ufUvaDW...@brightview.co.uk...
F
> choose based on fares, frequent flyer plans (including alliances) or
> schedules. Both AF and IB fly essentially similar fleets.
Thanks, that was useful. I'll go with IB as they're offering the best fares.
--
F
KGB
Hi
I have never flown with Air France, but have heard that Charles de
Gaulle airport in Paris is to be avoided.
I have flown to South America a couple of times with Iberia in the
past couple of years and cannot really fault them. The planes seemed
no scruffier than most other airlines; the flights all arrived on
time, my entire luggage arrived safely, and Madrid airport was
relatively easy to negotiate. The only problem I have ever had was
being re-scheduled due to an Iberia cabin crew strike at the end of
October. However, despite the strike, Iberia still got me to where I
wanted to go, on time - admittedly with no cabin service on the short
Heathrow/Madrid leg due to the strike, although the Madrid/Chile leg
was fine.
Another point in their favour is that my wife accidentally left an
expensive jacket on the plane in Santiago, Chile. She didn't realize
until we arrived at our hotel and, although she never expected to see
it again, she phoned the airline. They had found the jacket and it
had been taken to their office at the airport. As we were flying out
again in a couple of days, we said it would probably be simpler for us
just to collect it from the airport, which we did with no problems.
I would certainly be quite happy flying with them again. On the other
hand, I have vowed never again to fly with BA. My last 6 flights with
them all went pear-shaped either delayed, cancelled due to technical
problems and on one occasion, my flight from London to Buenos Aires
returned to Heathrow after an hour - and that is without mentioning
the horrors of Heathrow terminal 5 !!!!.
Regards
KGB
William Black
> I have never flown with Air France, but have heard that Charles de
> Gaulle airport in Paris is to be avoided.
It's clean, comfortable and very expensive.
> I have vowed never again to fly with BA.
Me too.
--
William Black
"Any number under six"
The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
single handed with a quarterstaff.
F
Thanks for the response: really very useful.
> I have never flown with Air France, but have heard that Charles de
> Gaulle airport in Paris is to be avoided.
We've flown in and out of, but not transited, CDG and found it ok.
> I have flown to South America a couple of times with Iberia in the
> past couple of years and cannot really fault them.
That's good news as I decided to book with them.
�180pp less than AF though longer journey times due to the LHR - MAD leg.
> The planes seemed
> no scruffier than most other airlines; the flights all arrived on
> time, my entire luggage arrived safely, and Madrid airport was
> relatively easy to negotiate.
That, too, is good news. We arrive into T4 and leave from T4S.
> The only problem I have ever had was
> being re-scheduled due to an Iberia cabin crew strike at the end of
> October. However, despite the strike, Iberia still got me to where I
> wanted to go, on time - admittedly with no cabin service on the short
> Heathrow/Madrid leg due to the strike, although the Madrid/Chile leg
> was fine.
It sounds like we're doing the same/similar journey: UK to Santiago,
though we're coming back from Buenos Aires.
The whole journey, MAN - LHR - MAD - SCL, EZE - MAD - LHR - MAN is
booked as IB but MAN - LHR is operated BA, MAD - SCL by LAN and LHR -
MAN by BA again.
> On the other
> hand, I have vowed never again to fly with BA.
We're not impressed with them. Mainly poor in-flight service, which is
quite ironic considering what BA pay their cabin crew and their recent
threat of strike action.
> and that is without mentioning
> the horrors of Heathrow terminal 5 !!!!.
We've been through T5 just once and actually enjoyed the experience.
--
F
KGB
Hi
<SNIP>
>> The planes seemed
>> no scruffier than most other airlines; the flights all arrived on
>> time, my entire luggage arrived safely, and Madrid airport was
>> relatively easy to negotiate.
>
>That, too, is good news. We arrive into T4 and leave from T4S.
The first time I arrived at T4 and left from T4S I had to use the
"driverless train" between them. It is well signed and, although a
bit of a walk, fairly easy to get to. However, at the end of October,
the train was out of action and we were taken by shuttle bus direct
from the plane to terminal 4S. I don't know whether this was a short
or long-term change, so you need to be sure before you leave the plane
- it was clearly announced as we came into land however.
>It sounds like we're doing the same/similar journey: UK to Santiago,
>though we're coming back from Buenos Aires.
Outbound sounds similar - we left Madrid for Santiago at 00.10AM and
arrived SCL around 9.00am.
A couple of years ago I treated myself to an Antarctic trip, my
route should have been MAN-LHR-EZE-Ushuaia and back the same way, all
with BA except for the internal flight to Ushuaia (with Aerolineas
Argentinas). However, outbound was a complete disaster and, after the
EZE flight returned to LHR with instrument problems, BA more or less
said that they could only get me to Sao Paulo in a couple of days,
take it or leave it - and beyond Sao Paulo was nothing to do with them
anyway. After pointing out I wasn't even going to Sao Paulo and
actually it was their responsibility - it was all on their ticket -
they relented and rebooked me to Ushuaia using Air Iberia via Madrid
for the EZE leg. Outbound went smoothly after that and I was quietly
impressed with IB. The return BA flights were equally as bad and I
vowed never to fly with them again.
In October my wife and I had a round the world trip, the first phase
being MAN to SCL and because of my above experience, we used Air
Iberia again. The only problem was that at short notice, IB cabin
crew decided to strike on the very day we were due to fly to Madrid,
but they quickly re-scheduled us onto a flight that was still
operating and, apart from lack of cabin service on the short LHR-MAD
flight due to the strike, all went smoothly.
Because we were going round the World, we didn't return via Madrid.
If you need one, there is fairly obvious money changing counter at
Santiago airport - I think it was just before baggage reclaim. My
wife was in charge of the money and thought the rates were reasonable.
>
>The whole journey, MAN - LHR - MAD - SCL, EZE - MAD - LHR - MAN is
>booked as IB but MAN - LHR is operated BA, MAD - SCL by LAN and LHR -
>MAN by BA again.
In October, the first leg of our round the world trip was
MAN-LHR-MAD-SCL and we arrived at Heathrow T5 and left from T4. The
recommended transit time between those terminals at LHR is 90 minutes
and outbound, it took nearly that long. I assume that security has
been tightened even more since Christmas, so presumably it could take
even longer.
>We've been through T5 just once and actually enjoyed the experience.
Strewth, you are braver than me!!! I regard airports as something
to be endured, not enjoyed. 8^)
Actually, we had a potentially trip threatening experience the last
time we were in T5. We had just sat down in a relatively quiet corner
of T5, when my wife suddenly jumped to her feet and whispered that we
were moving, she would explain later. It turned out she had spotted
that the chap I had sat next to was exhibiting all the symptoms of
swine flu; hoarse voice, sweating, coughing, sneezing, shivering,
pale, etc. - just what you need at the start of a Round the World
trip!! Fortunately we never caught anything.
Regards
KGB
F
noted for when we take the trip!
--
F