United To Bangkok From U.s.a.

[Jimjim]

The best price quotes I'm getting for travel to Bangkok from the U.S. are on airlines like United and Northwest. I didn't enjoy Northwest to Bangkok as the entertainment options were more like you'd see in the 1980s, i.e. no AVOD or even video display at each seat, just a movie screen at the front of the compartment. Horrible, in this day and age, I think. But how about United, do they have AVOD (personal video in the seatback in front of you where you can watch your own channels, movies and shows on demand and a pause/play button) on their Boeing 777 to Tokyo and from there 747 to Bangkok? Anyone know? Talking about economy class.

How's the service on United in general?

[sbk]

Service is ok, I don't mind the fact that the flight attendants are older as they tend to be better at dealing with unruly passengers (or passengers unruly kids. One China airlines flight i took the kid next to me ran up and down the aisles for quite a long period of time, smacking people as he went. mom did nothing, flight attendants did nothing. but, I can see United attendants making sure stuff like that does not happen). food is not too bad, inflight entertainment depends on the plane. I've found that the flights to Seattle from tokyo always have it, to SF not sure and lax often not. Bkk to Tokyo, no.

One thing tho, since I fly every year, is United has a very good ff program (frequent flyer) miles do not expire, you just have to make sure you add miles once a year. I have a United mileage plus visa card and use that whenever I am in the US and that combined with the very long flights has really given me quite a few free flights (well plus tax). They also reward people who rack up the miles with them pretty well too (I am a premier member now and get economy plus seats at no extra cost and get bumped up to business quite regularly)and booking award travel with the United Bangkok office has always been painfree.

All in all, the planes aren't as great as Singapore, but I have been happy enough.

[britmaveric]

Well you need to make sure you are on the 777 if you fly UAL - only ones with seat back video. The 747 they use - have the common screen. Its normally better going from yankland to thailand then the other way around. I normally find an all asian flight crew going from USA to Thailand and reverse on the way back. Asian flight attendents are well let's face it more attentive and actually do a better job then their yank counterparts.

[metisdead]

I prefer United to Northworst. Some years ago, upon check in at BKK airport, UA was full to Tokyo, so they put us on Northworst, at the time they had old 747's and United had the new 747-400's, quite a difference.

Flew with them last year, June/July, service is not bad.

[geriatrickid]

Visit the UA website and check which routes have the updated planes. I used to fly BKK - NRT on the old 747, it was finally upgraded. The connecting flight to Chicago is still the old equipment, but the LAX flight has been upgraded. It makes a big difference. I have switched over from UA to TG on the BKK-NRT route because the 07:35 vs the 06:50 departure lets me sleep a little later, plus there is less hassle chacking in. UA really screens its PAX (not complaining, but it can add an extra 30-45 minutes). Used to take the ANA 08:00 flight but the connections wery dicey. I mention this because you may want to check out which UA flight you are on since ANA/TG/UA have 3 flights all coded shared that depart BKK for the USA in the moning. UA doesn't staff its conenction desk in NRT. There was 1 ticket agent to handle all the transfers coming off of the BKK flight. Lucky for me I was using someone else, otherwise I would have had a coronary stressing out.

I doubt you will have a modern entertainment system on any of the older UA planes especially a 777 from ORD. 747 NRT to BKK yes.

[JMRhoa123]

I avoid UA like the plague. I fly BKK to Tokyo monthly and will usually pay up to twice the fare to fly someone else. Exception being the last few months where they were offering double elite qualifying miles. The entertainment options are pretty bad. Even if you do have the seatback TV's on the 777, it is not an on demand system. The movies just run on a repeating cycle.

The service on UA is either really good, or really bad. In my experience, it us usually pretty bad with the occasional exception. There are no more Asian based flight attendants. Your NRT-BKK leg will be flown using senior US based flight attendants. The BKK and HKG bases were closed a few months ago due to union requirements and staffing reductions.

On the plus side, if you can get into the economy plus part of the airplane, the extra legroom helps offset the crappy service

[bkkrox]

I avoid UA like the plague. I fly BKK to Tokyo monthly and will usually pay up to twice the fare to fly someone else. Exception being the last few months where they were offering double elite qualifying miles. The entertainment options are pretty bad. Even if you do have the seatback TV's on the 777, it is not an on demand system. The movies just run on a repeating cycle.

The service on UA is either really good, or really bad. In my experience, it us usually pretty bad with the occasional exception. There are no more Asian based flight attendants. Your NRT-BKK leg will be flown using senior US based flight attendants. The BKK and HKG bases were closed a few months ago due to union requirements and staffing reductions.

On the plus side, if you can get into the economy plus part of the airplane, the extra legroom helps offset the crappy service

Agree that the service can range from really good to really awful,just luck of the day,whereas TG , SQ and most other Asian airlines offer a more consistent service.

UA have a base in Tokyo and they staff the NRT-BKK-NRT flight,not senior US based crew. UA also have a base in HKG. The two regional bases in Asia that were closed due to staffing reductions in the U.S were at BKK and SIN. These bases may re-open once the U.S based crew that are on furlough are called back.

[JMRhoa123]

I avoid UA like the plague. I fly BKK to Tokyo monthly and will usually pay up to twice the fare to fly someone else. Exception being the last few months where they were offering double elite qualifying miles. The entertainment options are pretty bad. Even if you do have the seatback TV's on the 777, it is not an on demand system. The movies just run on a repeating cycle.

The service on UA is either really good, or really bad. In my experience, it us usually pretty bad with the occasional exception. There are no more Asian based flight attendants. Your NRT-BKK leg will be flown using senior US based flight attendants. The BKK and HKG bases were closed a few months ago due to union requirements and staffing reductions.

On the plus side, if you can get into the economy plus part of the airplane, the extra legroom helps offset the crappy service

Agree that the service can range from really good to really awful,just luck of the day,whereas TG , SQ and most other Asian airlines offer a more consistent service.

UA have a base in Tokyo and they staff the NRT-BKK-NRT flight,not senior US based crew. UA also have a base in HKG. The two regional bases in Asia that were closed due to staffing reductions in the U.S were at BKK and SIN. These bases may re-open once the U.S based crew that are on furlough are called back.

You are correct, it was the BKK and SIN bases that closed. The NRT based FAs only make up some of the flight. The rest are from US bases. My experience has been if your area is served by the NRT FAs, you usually get good service. If you get the US ones, it is hit or miss.

[Jimjim]

Hmmm, one person says the 777's will have entertainment system, another says the 747-400's and not the 777's. Ok, I'll try and check the website but have found that's not always a for sure thing. Thanks, though.

[BKKdreaming]

last Thursday the BKK-NRT flight was a 747 with the screen in front

the NRT -SFO was a newer plane with screen inn the seat in front of you ,

I "think" the LAX-NRT flight had the screen in front but really do not remember as I never watch the movies anyway and prefer to sleep !

[Carmine6]

The 747-400's I've flown recently only have the cabin screens. SFO to NRT and back. I believe the LAX to NRT are the same. The 777 NRT to BKK had setback screens.

However, as mentioned previously, the movies are on a loop on different channels, not on demand. So you have to catch the start times even with the individual screens.

Service is ok, but at least the price has now come down to match the level of service.

[rchapstick]

Absolutely no AVOD on any UA plane in economy. Individual screens in economy in the 777, one big screen on the 747.

On UA's newly configured 747's you get AVOD in biz and first, but not in economy. Same will be true when they reconfigure the 777, to the best of my knowledge.

[noahvail]

Absolutely no AVOD on any UA plane in economy. Individual screens in economy in the 777, one big screen on the 747.

On UA's newly configured 747's you get AVOD in biz and first, but not in economy. Same will be true when they reconfigure the 777, to the best of my knowledge.

That's the joy of my iPod classic with sony noise-canceling earphones. 40 hours play time, put the seat back and sleep to classical music. Oh, and if you order vegetarian meals, you get served first, and they're fairly decent, especially compared to the standard stuff you'd get.

[akarmaka]

i would suggest flying the other way through heathrow or frankfurt, it is a longer trip but i have found it to be much cheaper and way better service. here's a history of my travels since i travel about two times from chicago to bangkok and vice versa.

i used to travel united, tried northwest once but it was horrible.

tried thai airways from lax once and it was nice but a bit pricey and recently i heard they have stopped this route.

this time, i flew british airways from chicago to heathrow, emirates from heathrow to dubai, emirates from dubai to bangkok. i have to say, best flying experience ever, although it did take a full 24 hours of flying i think, but the price tag was half of what i was getting from chicago to bangkok via narita. so i would encourage to look for other routes. united's service does not compare to emirates'.

[GeorgeW]

tried thai airways from lax once and it was nice but a bit pricey and recently i heard they have stopped this route.

They have not discontinued the flight to LAX. It was the flight to JFK that was eliminated in the middle of last year.

[NanLaew]

I used UA pretty consistently and racked up the miles between 2004 and 2006. Quickly made Silver status and that pretty much ensured Economy Plus seating which makes a helluva difference on those long sectors (they are ALL long from Houston). Service was never startling but it was never bad either. Then they had an unfortunate ticketing snafu when I changed my reservation late on a Friday night (US time) and had 2 'live' bookings in the system over the weekend. That weekend coincided with last week of Japanese school hols and SFO-NRT was oversold so they upgraded and routed me via Beijing with US and China Airlines, arriving in BKK about 40 minutes later than the plane from NRT. The ticketing clerk at SFO issued that sector against the 'canceled' reservation so I was charged for BOTH tickets as UA rules say if you fly ONE sector of a multi-part ticket, you are assumed to have flown ALL sectors. Despite being physically impossible to depart on two different flights, 40 minutes apart, to separate destinations, there was no way that their Customer Service (Indian call center) could issue a 100% refund. I did get the equivalent in UA MCO's that were valid for 1-year but non-extendable and non-transferable. I never flew the Pacific sectors during that time (I was working in Brazil) so lost that 'refund'. They also left my checked bags behind in SFO that weekend and then took 3 days to get them to me in Bangkok despite the frequency of daily flights on the SFO-NRT-BKK route.

I burned off my 160,000 miles quickly and now rack up my Star Alliance miles on TG.

Edited June 2, 2009 by NanLaew

[geordie]

I flew LA to Bangkok direct 4 weeks ago on United and they did have screens in the seats in economy.

Geordie

[NanLaew]

From a fresh UA promotion

"Need more miles for your next award ticket on United? Now is the perfect time to get them. Because for a limited time, we have reduced the price to $0.025 per mile.

OFFER DETAILS

* Purchase up to 60,000 Mileage Plus miles for yourself

* A $35 transaction fee and 7.5% excise tax applies

* Miles do not count toward elite qualification

* Offer is valid now through June 30, 2009, at 11:59 p.m. Central Time"

That's US$1500 + $35 + tax for the equivalent of a 'Saver' ticket r/t to/from Bangkok. Is that really such a good deal?

Edited June 2, 2009 by NanLaew

[NanLaew]

I flew LA to Bangkok direct 4 weeks ago on United and they did have screens in the seats in economy.

Geordie

LAX-BKK direct on UA? Really?

[Carmine6]

From a fresh UA promotion

"Need more miles for your next award ticket on United? Now is the perfect time to get them. Because for a limited time, we have reduced the price to $0.025 per mile.

OFFER DETAILS

* Purchase up to 60,000 Mileage Plus miles for yourself

* A $35 transaction fee and 7.5% excise tax applies

* Miles do not count toward elite qualification

* Offer is valid now through June 30, 2009, at 11:59 p.m. Central Time"

That's US$1500 + $35 + tax for the equivalent of a 'Saver' ticket r/t to/from Bangkok. Is that really such a good deal?

Those only make sense for those who are just a little short of making it. Say 50,000 miles expiring this year or something like that. If it were cheaper than a ticket, people would just load the miles and take up all the free seats.

[TexasRanger]

I flew LA to Bangkok direct 4 weeks ago on United

I doubt that.

[bkkrox]

I flew LA to Bangkok direct 4 weeks ago on United

I doubt that.

A "direct" flight is one that continues as the same flight number. So UA can sell/promote a flight from LAX to BKK via NRT as a "direct" flight provided that the flight number does not change.

A "non-stop" flight is,well,non-stop.

[gk10002000]

The best price quotes I'm getting for travel to Bangkok from the U.S. are on airlines like United and Northwest. I didn't enjoy Northwest to Bangkok as the entertainment options were more like you'd see in the 1980s, i.e. no AVOD or even video display at each seat, just a movie screen at the front of the compartment. Horrible, in this day and age, I think. But how about United, do they have AVOD (personal video in the seatback in front of you where you can watch your own channels, movies and shows on demand and a pause/play button) on their Boeing 777 to Tokyo and from there 747 to Bangkok? Anyone know? Talking about economy class.

How's the service on United in general?

I flew United once and AA once. United was actually better. The AA 747 from chicago to Narita was crap. Had a pulldown movie screen on the bulkhead for the movie. Thank god I connected with JAL from tokyo to BKK. Night and day. Lovely attendents even cleaned the bathroom regularly during the trip.

Can't recall what the United flight had for entertainment. nine trips now and they are starting to blur together in my mind.

[Tinkelbell]

quoted......"I flew United once and AA once. United was actually better. The AA 747 from chicago to Narita was crap...."

............................................................................../

Having just flew on AA from Dallas to NRT on boeing 777 three weeks ago. My experience was more like a dream.

I enjoyed all the service and amenity from these middle aged flight attendants. Was up grade to first class would sure help also. The service was efficiently, no non-sense attitude, very professional.

The seat was roomy yet you feel privacy enough, you feel more like you're in your own living room more than you're in the air plane cabin. I spent most of my time sleeping, the bed was so comfy with a silky comforter.

For a long time, I used to fly to BKK on Cathay, Korean, Air Canada etc. Have you ever notice, the lovely young flight attendants work very hard and fast to serve you meals. After all meals had been cleared. Then comes the merchandised carts selling ( duty free) liqueurs, cosmetics, jewelries, cartons of cigarate etc.

They doing a very brisk business, you got no service cos they all busy taking care their customers ( not passengers). The whole thing usually take up to 2 hrs. If you need to go to the toilet during that time, you better hold it.

The differces is they never have this kind of pest, peddling yours ware on United or AA.

[TheWalkingMan]

The best price quotes I'm getting for travel to Bangkok from the U.S. are on airlines like United and Northwest. I didn't enjoy Northwest to Bangkok as the entertainment options were more like you'd see in the 1980s, i.e. no AVOD or even video display at each seat, just a movie screen at the front of the compartment. Horrible, in this day and age, I think. But how about United, do they have AVOD (personal video in the seatback in front of you where you can watch your own channels, movies and shows on demand and a pause/play button) on their Boeing 777 to Tokyo and from there 747 to Bangkok? Anyone know? Talking about economy class.

How's the service on United in general?

I just checked and it looks like Northwest has brought back the A330 on the NRT-BKK route. The last time I flew on their A330, there was a AVOD system so I presume that it is the same as now.

[bonobo]

I flew LA to Bangkok direct 4 weeks ago on United

I doubt that.

A "direct" flight is one that continues as the same flight number. So UA can sell/promote a flight from LAX to BKK via NRT as a "direct" flight provided that the flight number does not change.

A "non-stop" flight is,well,non-stop.

I am a United 1K (and have been for about 7 years in a row now), so I rack up the miles with them. I personally think this "direct flight" copncept sucks. If I fly "direct" from BKK to LAX or SFO, I get x number of miles, which is the as-the-crow-flies distance between the two cities. But if I fly on planes which have different numbers, even though it is the exact same route, I get more miles, essentially the total miles for each leg. It is worse when I fly to San Diego. If I fly UA 891, BKK-SAN, that will cost me well over a thousand miles when compared to if I fly 891 to Narita, another one to LAX, then a puddle jumper to SAN.

[Unicorn]

The least expensive flight to Bangkok are via CHINA AIRLINES and I have used them for years . . . and their service is OK and the flights are just fine . . . considering so much cheaper than UA !!!!! Try it !!!

The best price quotes I'm getting for travel to Bangkok from the U.S. are on airlines like United and Northwest. I didn't enjoy Northwest to Bangkok as the entertainment options were more like you'd see in the 1980s, i.e. no AVOD or even video display at each seat, just a movie screen at the front of the compartment. Horrible, in this day and age, I think. But how about United, do they have AVOD (personal video in the seatback in front of you where you can watch your own channels, movies and shows on demand and a pause/play button) on their Boeing 777 to Tokyo and from there 747 to Bangkok? Anyone know? Talking about economy class.

How's the service on United in general?

[Carmine6]

The least expensive flight to Bangkok are via CHINA AIRLINES and I have used them for years . . . and their service is OK and the flights are just fine . . . considering so much cheaper than UA !!!!! Try it !!!

The best price quotes I'm getting for travel to Bangkok from the U.S. are on airlines like United and Northwest. I didn't enjoy Northwest to Bangkok as the entertainment options were more like you'd see in the 1980s, i.e. no AVOD or even video display at each seat, just a movie screen at the front of the compartment. Horrible, in this day and age, I think. But how about United, do they have AVOD (personal video in the seatback in front of you where you can watch your own channels, movies and shows on demand and a pause/play button) on their Boeing 777 to Tokyo and from there 747 to Bangkok? Anyone know? Talking about economy class.

How's the service on United in general?

They seem to have an abnormal amount of incidents like their plane catching on fire at the airport in Japan in 2007.

[Spee]

The AA 747 from chicago to Narita was crap.

AA does not have 747's in its fleet. That has been a 777 route for years and years. And the AA 777's have been arguably one of the top long haul aircraft for years, in terms of seating, on-board entertainment and service.

[sbk]

I used to fly China airlines and found their ff flyer program to be less than ideal. Sure, its cheaper but in the long run, I think its less than beneficial.