Offers to Asia on finnair - BKK from £455

FunTime

richardw wrote: »

Another A350 review http://www.airlinequality.com/airline-reviews/finnair/page/4/

""seats were comfy"
J Keep (United Kingdom) 8th April 2016

We were pleasantly surprised by the A350 on our flight from London Heathrow to Helsinki, it was very airy and notably quieter than any other plane we've flown. Seats were comfy and it was great to have a decent range of films for the relatively short flight which is mostly on an A321. The cabin crew were mostly friendly, if slightly business-like. I would say that even a small free snack would be appreciated given the price of flights, though their trademark blueberry juice is very tasty. Transfer at HEL onto regional A321 flight to Kittilä was quick, pleasant and easy. Only slightly disorganised part of the trip was when the plane stopped at Ivalo en route to Kittilä where cabin crew made no effort to get pax to sit in their designated seats, leaving many to change around and find a seat. Overall though we were happy flying Finnair and given the fact they're the only option on that route, would do so again.
Aircraft A350
Type Of Traveller Couple Leisure
Cabin Flown Economy Class
Route LHR to KTT via HEL"
Date Flown April 2016
Seat Comfort 12345"

Some find them comfy, some don't.

Exactly

I had no problem with my seat on the 788.

It's only you who has decided to make an issue about the seating and once again, you have fallen flat on your face. Leave it alone! The thread is a fail! Let it lie!

richardw

FunTime wrote: »

...It's only you who has decided to make an issue about the seating....

I merely explained how a large diameter fuselage with the same number of seats across gives more space, something that was ignored by your comparison.

FunTime

budgetflyer wrote: »

OMAN are doing business class Paris to several Indian cities for just over £900 btw.

£85 more to BKK

FunTime

richardw wrote: »

I merely explained how a large diameter fuselage with the same number of seats across gives more space, something that was ignored by your comparison.

It wasn't ignored. I just didn't feel the need to go over the minutiae when it was already patently clear that £455 for that product wasn't any kind of good deal at all.

I've nothing against FinnAir. If the price was right, I too would consider them. But it isn't, so I won't.

richardw

FunTime wrote: »

...I just didn't feel the need to go over the minutiae....

More space on long sectors at a low extra cost per flight hour flown is hardly minutiae, an extra 7kg in checked baggage allowance which you highlighted is irrelevant minutiae. You really must learn to do a sensible comparison before making patently wrong assumptions and repeating irrelevancies.

FunTime

richardw wrote: »

More space on long sectors at a low extra cost per flight hour flown is hardly minutiae, an extra 7kg in checked baggage allowance which you highlighted is irrelevant minutiae. You really must learn to do a sensible comparison before making patently wrong assumptions and repeating irrelevancies.

Please stop writing this utter nonsense!
You appear to have conveniently forgotten that seven hours of the flight time with Oman Air is on the A330 with a 34" seat pitch and an 18" seat width. Far superior to the FinnAir offering. I suppose that you will try to tell us that FinnAir's A320 from London to Helsinki somehow also transcends it's 31" seat pitch.

So let's see your calculations that led you to believe that you have received more space "at a lower cost per flight hour" You are definitely having a lark.

Once you work out the cubic inches of space that you are allocated for seven hours with a 34" seat pitch and an 18" seat width and six and a half hours with a 31" seat pitch and let's say a 17.3" seat width and then compare it with the space and service you receive on an A320 with a 31" seat pitch and and 18* seat width for two hours and fifty minutes and then for another nine hours and fifty minutes again with a 31" seat pitch and an 18" seat width.

Only a tiny mind could imagine that a possible 0.7" increase. in seat width is somehow superior to 3" increase in seat pitch.

So we can see immediately that there is no advantage to FinnAir in overall space. In fact I would argue that the balance is tilted towards Oman Air.

Now on to time;

Since the A350 flight has a length of 9 hours and 50 mins. It means that you are cramped into a 31" seat pitch for nearly ten hours in one go and nearly thirteen hours overall.

But with Oman you have the far superior seat pitch of 34". So you have the advantage of 3" more space for seven hours. Let's put that in the bank.

For the remaining time you have the same seat pitch, but a little less width, let's say 0.7".

So we have six and a half hours with a 17.3" seat width. Let's take that away from Oman.

So Oman Air has an advantage of seven hours with an extra 2.3" of space. above FinnAir.

Only in your wild imagination does FinnAir have more space overall.

Now let's go further.

With Oman Air you will receive two meal per sector, with the corresponding refreshments.

FinnAir, perhaps a snack from London to Helsinki. Most certainly not a full meal and let's not ignore that the £455 flight takes of from Heathrow at 7.30am. Hardly convenient.

Sorry mate, but you've failed miserably on every single count. You just make things up as you go along, hoping that it will stick.
It's really sad to see...unless you are a masochist. In which case you must be having a great time.

FunTime

Irrelevancies?
This from the person who recommends that everyone should book direct with the airlines in so that there are no extra costs involved in changes, but now is trying to tell us that preferring a flexible ticket is an irrelevancy and that FinnAir totally inflexible ticket is fine.
He is also telling that people who have needed to rearrange stuff in their luggage because of it being overweight, that the free extra 7kgs is an irrelevancy.
He is telling us that a £100 saving is an irrelevancy.

No, richardw wants to focus only on seat space. But then forgets that Oman Air has the far superior space of the A330 for seven hours on the route. Completely destroying the straw he was attempting to clutch.

What next, richardw? Do you actually think that you have convinced even a single person with your very odd arguments?
Anyone spending that money will simply fly direct with THAI.

richardw

FACT Muscat to Bangkok is on a B787 aircraft with less space than A350 aircraft, that's more than 12.5 hours feeling cramped and uncomfortable for a return journey, the extra cost to fly on A350 aircraft is approximately £7.32 per hour flight time.

FACT Finnair operate A350 aircraft between LHR-HEL, the route is not wholly operated by A320 aircraft. LHR-HEL on A350 aircraft leaves at 10.20am

FunTime

richardw wrote: »

FACT Muscat to Bangkok is on a B787 aircraft with less space than A350 aircraft, that's more than 12.5 hours feeling cramped and uncomfortable, the extra cost to fly on A350 aircraft is approximately £7.32 per hour flight time.

FACT Finnair operate A350 aircraft between LHR-HEL, the route is not wholly operated by A320 aircraft. LHR-HEL on A350 aircraft leaves at 10.20am

London to Muscat is seven hours on the spacious A330.. Muscat to Bangkok is six and a half hours, So why are you claiming that Muscat to Bangkok is twelve and a half hours??
Are you hoping to trick someone by deliberately posting disinformation?

richardw

FunTime wrote: »

So why are you claiming that Muscat to Bangkok is twelve and a half hours??

The price difference is £100 for a return journey, a return journey includes Muscat-Bangkok-Muscat which is more than 12.5 hours flight time on a B787.