# Most comfortable airline for London?



## suesam (May 16, 2009)

Any opinions about which airline is the most comfortable to fly to London? We flew Mexicana Airlines to Cancun in Feb and wow was it a lot nicer than flying American, etc. Much better service. I am not a real fan of flying so would like to have a little comfort and pampering. Can't afford first class however. Is British Airways a good airline? 

Thanks for any advice! 
Sue


----------



## DeniseM (May 16, 2009)

I have flow North West and British Air to London and enjoyed both of them.


----------



## Talent312 (May 16, 2009)

I endorse Continental and Virgin Atlantic.  BA's okay, but nothing to write home about.
Delta would be near the bottom of my list.  The worst... no-name and charter-type LCC's.


----------



## icydog (May 19, 2009)

We flew on BA upper-class coach and it was worth the extra money. Wider seats, our own flight attendant, and more courteous treatment. 

We've flown on CO, but only in First class, and there is no comparison to coach, so it was fine

We flew on Virgin in coach and found the seats smaller than US seats. Otherwise the flights were really nice. 

We've flown in coach on DL and hated it!!!! I mean hated it!!!!


----------



## "Roger" (May 19, 2009)

I suspect from the previous message that BA upper class coach and Virgin Premium Economy are similar.  The latter offers wider seats and many of the perks of business class, but for _much_ less than business class prices.


----------



## Hoc (May 19, 2009)

BA First class was about the best to London, unless you can figure out a way to fly via Cathay First Class.  American in First was average, though I understand that Iberia Business Class is nice, and Emirates in First is very nice.


----------



## Carolinian (May 20, 2009)

The best TATL service on a US carrier is NW's A330's, but some of them are now flying DL routes.  And NW is the only US-based carrier to offer unlimited free alcohol to coach passengers on TATL flights.  I am sure that perk will be ended by DL, which has taken over NW, later this year.

In flying to London, I would also consider the airport you are flying into.  Try to find one of the handful of TATL flights still going into Gatwick, the nicest of London's airports.  Too many US-based carriers have switched to Heathrow, which one travel guidebook series rates as the worst airport in Europe.


----------



## Beaglemom3 (May 20, 2009)

Flying from Boston/Logan can be done in 5-5.5 flying hours, so my point of reference may be different due to shortened flying times. I am, however, tallish, so leg room is an issue for me.
All travel is by coach unless I get bumped into 1st Class. 

As a sort-of frequent (1-2x/yr) flyer to London (am an Allen House owner), I like Virgin and British Airways for comfort and service.

For convenience, I like American as they have an a.m. flight that gets me to London at night which is better for my circadian rhythm.

B.


----------



## suesam (May 21, 2009)

Thanks for all of the great responses. I have heard from another friend that flying into Gatwick was preferable. I will need to research that as well. 

Thanks so much! 
Sue


----------



## Hoc (May 21, 2009)

suesam said:


> Thanks for all of the great responses. I have heard from another friend that flying into Gatwick was preferable. I will need to research that as well.



It depends what you want in your airports.  If you have a long layover time, Heathrow may be preferable because it has a lot more variety in the way of shops, restaurants, airline clubs, etc.  However, the downside is that it can get quite crowded, which can mean long lines and connect times.  In addition, BAA at Heathrow can be pretty arbitrary and instransigent at the checkpoint, even to the point of insisting that you throw out mashed potatoes, or not be allowed through security.  There are long walks between gates and from shopping areas to gates, and sometimes you arrive at one terminal, and have to take a bus to another from which you are leaving.  So, it depends on your situation and tolerance for crowds and lines.


----------



## Beaglemom3 (May 22, 2009)

suesam said:


> Thanks for all of the great responses. I have heard from another friend that flying into Gatwick was preferable. I will need to research that as well.
> 
> Thanks so much!
> Sue



Here's some opinions:  http://www.ricksteves.com/graffiti/helpline/index.cfm?topic=4824

If you query Heathrow v. Gatwick or Heathrow versus Gatwick, you'll get many hits.


Gatwick is farther out than Heathrow from my experience.

For me, getting to the Allen House, I love Heathrow. After going through immigration, customs and luggage retrieval, I can just walk a short distance and wheel my luggage onto the "Tube".

There is the Heathrow express Bus or Train, too for several pounds, but since I buy my Oyster Pass right away, I tube straight in.

Gatwick is a bit farther out and I don't think the Tube goes out that far unless something has changed.

I've landed at Stanstead before. It's an old RAF base, but a bit out.

Hoc is correct re: ammenities. Heathrow is loaded with shops, restaurants and about the best people-watching I've ever seen.


----------

