Sign in to follow this  
MindYerBeak

AirlineRatings.com's top 10 airlines for 2018

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Never flown with them, but I'm surprised Emirates aren't on the list, considering the amount of publicity they get and the way everyone raves about them.

Share this post


Link to post

9 of 10 from the Middle East and Far East where people meeting each other bow. Natural hospitality of the flight crews makes a good impression on most everybody traveling  !

Share this post


Link to post

What a shock that Ryanair aren't on the list :biggrin:

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting link ... no big surprises there, all very good airlines.

I was surprised by a recent domestic flight I did from KOAK to KLAS ... $55 ticket so wasn't expecting much, all coach but the seats were nice and comfortable and both times only 90 passengers on a 737-800 so middle seats were empty, even had wifi ... SouthWest, better than the Alaska Air flight I took last year.

I've always enjoyed British Airways and Qantas.  KLM was "ok" (not bad, not great) but love the accent/language.  The worst experience I've had was with TWA (back when they were around, late 70's I think, and I don't think it was a regular route) going from EGLL to OBBI ... just bad flight all around.

Here are some long haul flights in a related link that I'd love to do:

http://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/world-longest-air-routes/index.html

London to Perth in an 787 ... on my vacation list and if the QW 787 comes out for P3D, it'll be my first virtual test flight.

Cheers, Rob.

Share this post


Link to post

If by chance Air Canada made the list then the list is worthless.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

some long haul flights in a related link that I'd love to do:

The two longest-duration flights in there both terminate in Auckland.
I can confirm the west-bound leg is a crusher - over 17 hours.
You will be crossing two jetstreams is why:
https://www.ventusky.com/?p=-31.4;124.8;3&l=wind-200hpa
If you are bigger than the 95th percentile human, best you spring for Business Class otherwise risk Deep Vein Thrombosis. Heck, save up for 1st class because the taps are gold-plated and the doors close :)

But the uncontested Best in the Sky is Air New Zealand's B777 Bizclass.
Laid out in herringbone fashion you are hardly aware of fellow passengers, or even being on an aircraft.

I think they got Best Airline because of the Safety Videos, though :)

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, WingZ said:

The two longest-duration flights in there both terminate in Auckland.
I can confirm the west-bound leg is a crusher - over 17 hours.
You will be crossing two jetstreams is why:
https://www.ventusky.com/?p=-31.4;124.8;3&l=wind-200hpa
If you are bigger than the 95th percentile human, best you spring for Business Class otherwise risk Deep Vein Thrombosis. Heck, save up for 1st class because the taps are gold-plated and the doors close :)

I have a friend in Wellington that is a Defense Lawyer, and anyone who knows those guys they work a 120 hour week at least, His phone is constant ringing of course and around the clock. So for a getaway he booked Wellington to Prague and back with Emirates on Business Class. He only booked 8 hours in Prague so he would get to walk around and see some of the sights, then back on the planes and back to Wellington again.

I asked why only 8 hours at your destination for your vacation? Because the Aircraft is actually his vacation, when they close the doors it doesn't matter what happens you cannot get a hold of him, and Emirates pampers you and you can nod off and sleep. The 8 hours in Prague you can get a hold of him so really he is just walking around and looking at the sights with his mobile going off

I asked why Prague? He just shrugged and said "I've never been to Prague" :laugh:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Ive traveled on 5 of those airlines. All between Australia and North America. I liked Virgin Australia the most

Share this post


Link to post

"All of the top five airlines in the Skytrax 2017 rankings -- Qatar Airways, Singapore Airlines, ANA, Emirates and Cathay Pacific -- have huge international route networks for which they favor newer aircraft (Boeing 777-300ERs, Boeing 787s, Airbus A380s and Airbus A350s, for example). 

These feature mostly consistent on-board experiences where passengers can expect on-board power, entertainment systems and newer seats."

And a couple of those airlines are heavily and unfairly subsidized with government funds.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

And a couple of those airlines are heavily and unfairly subsidized with government funds.

Funny how this view keeps coming up. Yes the US Government doesn't do it but the USA is only 4.4% of the worlds population. So how is this unfair when less then 5% of the world doesn't agree with it? In this case I would say majority rules, this is just how the rest of the world does business is all, and the US does benefit from other Government Subsidies as well and here is how:

Air New Zealand ranks top for the 5th year in a row and it is with a 777 and 787 fleet, they are innovative in the cabin without having any A380's and that innovation has worked. Part of the strategy is Government Funding because of course the New Zealand Government wants to bring more people here being Islands at the bottom of the world, so that is a challenge. Also if you look at the cost of Aviation Fuel, Auckland Airport is one of the lowest for Jet Fuel, also this is subsidized by the New Zealand Government as a strategy to get more people here. For the past 7 years New Zealand has had record breaking tourism as a result.

American Airlines and United Airlines have opened up routes into Auckland just in the past few years, main reason was because Auckland was selling fuel for a lower price, also Air New Zealand was hitting record profits on the Auckland to LA route so they wanted some of that market share as well. Therefore those two US Carriers are benefiting from a New Zealand Government Subsidy as well. I end up paying slightly more at the gas pump so more people can pay less to fly here, but my business also benefits from more people coming here so I don't complain about the strategy. Also Boeing benefits from New Zealand Government Subsidies as well because they end up with a pretty awesome airline that buys really cool planes from them, and paints some of them All Black that really stands out above any other aircraft on the tarmac. Another win for a US company from a foreign subsidy.

So is all of this unfair? or just strategic and beneficial for all involved? I would say not unfair at all as everyone benefits including the US partners involved. For the Americans that come here it will be a vacation of a lifetime....win win win all around of you ask me :cool:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, Matthew Kane said:

American Airlines and United Airlines have opened up routes into Auckland just in the past few years, main reason was because Auckland was selling fuel for a lower price

Source please. :smile:

blaustern

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Bluestar said:

Source please. :smile:

blaustern

http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/81440091/american-airlines-auckland-flight-takes-off

http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/81380312/united-airlines-launches-auckland-san-francisco-route

 

Oh yes and I forgot to mention the USA also benefits with Kiwi's coming to the US in return due to lower ticket prices, this benefits both nations tourism

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

And a couple of those airlines are heavily and unfairly subsidized with government funds.

Considering oil subsidies in the US, one could easily reverse that debate  ... unless of course you go by Forbes definition of subsidiary which is "slanted".  In terms of oil subsidizers the US is ranked #2 (around $600B/yr all said and done) in the world (China #1 at $1.8T).  New Zealand oil subsidies are so low they don't even rank ... given that fuel is the highest percentage of overall operation costs of flight/airlines (at about 40%), you could argue US and China airlines have the overall highest governmental subsidized support.

Cheers, Rob.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

An that doesn't include the Military contracts which in many ways could be considered "subsidies".

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

New Zealand oil subsidies are so low they don't even rank ... given that fuel is the highest percentage of overall operation costs of flight/airlines (at about 40%), you could argue US and China airlines have the overall highest governmental subsidized support.

Yes because really all that NZ is doing is lowering the price of Jet Fuel to bring more Airlines here, but nothing for the rest of the fuel supply for the nation. At the pump we are currently paying over $2 NZD a liter, which is similar to the high prices found in Europe, so we don't benefit any at the gas pumps, just the airlines that refuel in Auckland.

http://www.globalpetrolprices.com/gasoline_prices/

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Matthew Kane said:

Yes because really all that NZ is doing is lowering the price of Jet Fuel to bring more Airlines here, but nothing for the rest of the fuel supply for the nation. At the pump we are currently paying over $2 NZD a liter, which is similar to the high prices found in Europe, so we don't benefit any at the gas pumps, just the airlines that refuel in Auckland.

http://www.globalpetrolprices.com/gasoline_prices/

What about Christchurch Intl Matthew ? I assume Cathay, SIA and Emirates etc get subsidied fuel as well ? Wellington ? Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post

These responses are funny since I was referring to Qatar and Emirates in my original post, but some people decided to defend their own favorite airlines. Every country does something to benefit their own domestic airlines but these two are notorious in that regard. They and their respective governments are trying to drive out all competition on specific routes.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Travelling_Wilbury said:

What about Christchurch Intl Matthew ? I assume Cathay, SIA and Emirates etc get subsidied fuel as well ? Wellington ? Just curious.

We only have one refinery in New Zealand, this one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsden_Point_Oil_Refinery

It has a pipeline to Auckland, for Wellington and Christchurch they have to transport it which raises the costs somewhat. Every airline pays the same for the fuel regardless of National Origin.

 

32 minutes ago, jabloomf1230 said:

These responses are funny since I was referring to Qatar and Emirates in my original post, but some people decided to defend their own favorite airlines. Every country does something to benefit their own domestic airlines but these two are notorious in that regard. They and their respective governments are trying to drive out all competition on specific routes.

Yes everyone has a similar scheme around the world. I see Dubai no different then Las Vegas, it is a scheme to try and bring people to the middle of a desert, Vegas came first, Dubai learned to do the same thing but on a bigger scale 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

http://www.twincities.com/2017/06/01/editorial-raising-an-alarm-about-unfair-airline-competition/amp/

Admittedly this is an editorial piece, but it does explain the issue which has nothing to do with bringing people to the middle of the desert. 

It was the same with Air Canada and Canadian Government disputes as well. And yes making Dubai a hub is exactly that, brings people to the middle of a desert regardless for as long as they stay when before they never had a reason to go there. Now they are going in the millions.

If you are in Sydney and you want to go to New York, you used to fly through LA, now more people choose to fly through Dubai instead, even for just a stop over. In the past no one would ever consider doing that. So yes a new business is effecting an old business and governments are subsidizing it to create growth in other areas. Depends on where you live in the world makes it a bad thing or not. USA is less then 5% of the worlds population so the other 95% does have benefits having more options available to them.

My opinion is I have never been through Dubai and never really care to. If I was going to London I could choose Dubai, Singapore or Los Angeles. For obvious reasons I would choose Singapore, simply because they treat you so much better then they do being in transit through LAX, which can be a terrible experience. Changi Airport is the best. 20 years ago LAX would have been the only real option here, having other options is better for everyone. If LAX was to clean up their act people would enjoy that once again. Travel is for pleasure and Changi and Dubai have got that figured out for the moment. 

Emirates using European Stops is also very strategic, because a lot of customers demanded it, if the US Carriers want to be better then do exactly that, be better then the customers will come back, or cry fowl but that isn't fixing the level of service. If I was flying New York to Milan I would absolutely choose Emirates over a US Carrier, simply because the service is better, .and this is the reason why other players are backing growth in this area, when someone else can do it better.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

Admittedly this is an editorial piece

Yes it is ... 

Quote

Their letter in April to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao says that the Mideast carriers’ subsidies — amounting to more than $50 billion — foster new routes that come “at the expense of U.S. airlines’ international networks, American jobs and ultimately will harm consumers.” ...

If left unchecked, the Mideast carriers will continue to expand in the United States, pushing out U.S. airlines and harming hard-working Americans, according to the partnership. It has engaged airline employees in the effort, including lobbying their representatives in Washington.

Lower prices harms consumers?  Disagree, lower prices increases travel, increases airport revenue, increases airport services revenue, increases fuel sales, gets more visitors/business moving from A to B and visa versa ... just like my $55 ticket from KOAK to KLAS on SouthWest, consumers go for what costs less.  Just like buying products from China, they costs less, more people by them.  The problem is one of Nationalism which is a barrier to Globalism ... sounds all too much like "made in America" or "made in China" or "made in Germany" ... it's a Global economy like it or not ... high tariffs and taxes doesn't really help anyone, it just makes things less affordable for the majority of people so they spend less everywhere.  Sorta like increasing the Tariffs on Hyundai cars by 200% so a similar equipped Hyundai SUV costs the same as a Ford SUV ... all that does is make consumers NOT buy and hang on to what they have ... you can't squeeze money out of people that don't have the money in an attempt to make them buy "American" or "German" or "Japanese" etc. etc.  

Like the current US government administration Tariff (80%) on Bombardier due to allegations from Boeing which were never proven accurate.  So if Delta wants to buy Bombardier planes it would effectively be a tax of about 300% which means Delta would cancel it's orders.  So now Canada is not going to go ahead and buy any Boeing aircraft.  This is good for who? 

Personally I think we should do away with all subsidies and let companies come and go on their own merit (it's our job to figure out how to beat the competition, not the governments) ... some countries are going to be better at providing products at lower costs than other countries for a variety of reasons, nothing we can or should do about it ... the chips are going to fall naturally, fighting that is a losing proposition (always has been and always will be) for everyone involved.

My "editorial piece" :)

Cheers, Rob.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

Here is another thing to ponder...

New Zealand is probably the worst country in the world for customer service. We are terrible at it, you can google it and you will see we are not good at it at all. Eat out in New Zealand and you will find out how bad we are. 

The USA in my view is probably the best in the world at customer service. Eat out at a Deli and New York it is awesome, have a coffee in North Carolina and the locals will make you feel right at home. I've been coast to coast and a lot of it in between and I have nothing but praise, I love the USA, you always make me laugh and smile.

Now how is it that Air New Zealand is the best 5 years in a row, when they are hiring people from a population so notoriously bad for Customer Service, and Americans, who are the best in the world at customer service, is so notoriously bad when it comes to serving anyone around Aviation?

Something doesn't make sense here. :huh:

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this