Sir - I congratulate Mr Bamberg on his letter about British Airways' expenditure on first-class improvements (Flight International, 11-17 October, P49). I frequently fly London-Sydney (in economy and business class). BA and Qantas offer poor long-haul economy class and the seats are no better than a London Hyde Park deck chair with buttons.
The first leg is 12h, the second 9h, and I shudder to think what the economy section would be like on the proposed Boeing 747 700-seater.
Recently, I flew Virgin/Ansett via Hong Kong. The Ansett sector was great, but Virgin appears to be remodeling itself on BA, Qantas, Singapore Airlines, or Cathay Pacific. Virgin used to be "user friendly for price and service".
Such airlines owe long-haul economy passengers more room.
TIM MAY
London, UK
...I would like to offer another perspective on the challenge for air transport. Having used cross-channel ferry services and British Rail Intercity services, my family and I have found the ease and speed of access and general convenience of service to be high. Service information is good.
I flew for the first time only this year. I did not object to more than 4h of economy-class travel, or the severely restricted service provision. What I found unacceptable, however, was the length of time taken from arrival at Heathrow to departure. A 2h flight delay produced nothing more than, a "not yet boarding" sign on the departures display.
I can see how direct competition between rail and air on short-haul routes can work against the air-transport industry. Could it be that British Airways' £500 million could be better spent on improving overall journey time? Is less than 1h an achievable target for airport arrival to flight departure?
I appreciate the business logic, which targets high-yield customers, but, without buoyant sales in the leisure sector, the industry will face problems. Will the customer continue to put up with less than high-technology overall service?
GREG HERDMAN
Retford, Nottinghamshire, UK
Source: Flight International
