These results are not surprising in the sense that there is not a single American carrier mentioned, but surprising because of the real lack of European carriers, too. I highly rate British Airways (when they are not on strike and ruining my Christmas travel plans) and I also very much enjoyed both KLM and Swiss. The ‘Airline of the Year’ league table is dominated by Middle Eastern, Asian and Oceanic airlines.
It is sad to see Thai slipping down the table. I seem to recall that they were in fourth position only a couple of years ago and I felt that such a high ranking was very much deserved as their economy product has always been fantastic on the many flights I have made with them. I suppose that until they get to work on bringing their 747s into the 21st century, they will continue to fall. Airlines that do not offer personal entertainment on long-haul flights are fast becoming a thing of the past, and this is where Thai unfortunately lets itself down.
I have not yet flown with Asiana on the long haul but I always enjoyed their domestic services within Korea, which I have used a number of times. I was amazed by the friendliness of the crew and their efficient service on flights of just 30-40 minutes. If the airline’s domestic product is anything to go by, then I am sure that long haul is quite impressive.
It puzzles me as to how this survey works though, so it would be appreciated if somebody could shed some light. These are all huge carriers, each flying millions of passengers a each year to destinations across the globe. How can smaller airlines, carrying fewer passengers, be recognised for their efforts and stand a chance in this competition? For example, I found Martinair’s service to be good enough back at the beginning of the year. Operating a fleet of just four 767s, it is obvious that they are not carrying anywhere near the same number of passengers as Qantas, Emirates, Cathay Pacific etc, so how does such a small airline have any chance in this survey?
Sign In
