Thoughts on Delta, AA, United

You might look at who is actually operating the flight. Example; UA is partnered with Lufthansa, Swiss, Austrian, Air Canada, so often when you dig in, the flights may actually operated by one of these partners, and even others with Europe.

I have pretty much used Swiss for the last 8 years and I love them.

Yes, I know about the partners like KLM, AirFrance, British Airways, etc - but seems 99% of the time for the long transatlantic flight - it is Delta or AA or United. For the shorter Intra-Europe flights, I'm not as concerned. Thank you.

I usually fly United and/or one of the Star Alliance partners because I live near their Dulles hub. I think they are fine (neither better or worse than other major carriers to Europe). With regard to food, I think all airline food is pretty bad so I usually eat in the airport and skip the meal.

Personally, I think route and connecting airport are more important than the airline operating the flight. I generally choose the best combo of route and price. What are the specific choices you are looking at?

YES - I don't eat the plane food either - but the people we travel with do (it certainly isn't anything I'd base flight on).

Charlotte to Newark to Vienna on United
Raleigh to Paris to Vienna on AA
Charlotte to Frankfurt to Vienna on Delta

Those are our ONE layover options. There are many 2 layover options that I am trying to avoid.

Thank You.

My experience on Delta is that they provide superior service, but at a higher price than AA and/or BA. United is somewhere in between. KLM is a distinct step down, and SAS stinks. This is all business class oriented; no idea what's happening back in steerage. Virgin Atlantic is the best TATL by far, but we don't get them much from LAX.

Our best intra-European flights have been on Aer Lingus and Norwegian. These have been economy class, as it's not worth paying more for what European airlines call "premium service." It's not very premium IME.

Choose #3. Get to Europe before you make your connection and don't connect in Paris.

Janet - we always connect in Paris or Amsterdam. Why not Paris?

Why not #1 and get a direct flight to Vienna?

Yeah, the EWR>VIE is operated by Austrian.

I see good prices on Lufthansa/Austrian from CLT, changing in Munich, which I would prefer. Paris can be a difficult transfer, and Munich is better than Frankfurt (IMHO), I like changing in Europe, as then you have more options. If you get delayed on the the way to EWR, you may be stuck waiting another day for the next flight. In Munich, it is not a bad train ride to Vienna if there is a problem with the transfer in Munich.

I prefer connecting in Europe because if your first flight is delayed there is a chance of getting on another flight the same day. I also think about which city I’d rather get stuck in if my flight were canceled.

1) I suspect the flight from Newark is actually on Austrian rather than United.

2) I hate connecting at CDG and avoid it, but to be fair I have not connected there in years. I have only arrived and departed there.
3) If price were the same, I’d choose to connect in Frankfurt.

Thanks Sam - good rationales.

Last year we went Raleigh to Vienna via Dulles. Booked through United though the international leg was on Austrian (in Premium Economy). Better than average experience on the transatlantic flights with Austrian. Food was actually pretty nice and service was pleasant and efficient. Easy connection in Dulles.

If you are flying Raleigh to Vienna via Paris I assume that would be on Air France (since Delta turned that flight over to them) for the connection in Paris. Took that flight last year as well. Indifferent service and food (in Premium Economy) and their PE seats are the shell type which I personally find very uncomfortable. Did not attempt a connection in Paris but previous attempts were stressful and not something I would like to do without plenty of time.

adgaliani -- thank you. I like these direct flights from the States straight to destination. Layovers and having to go thru Passport control in Europe & then catching another flight to final destination is always a gamble if the layover isn't long enough. There are definitely risks & benefits both ways.

I think your location, and even investment in an airline, may play a big role in choice.

I have usually flown Delta, partly because that was what I flew when working, I had miles, had lots of perks, so other airlines were a tough sell. Now with less overall travel, status declining year after year, I look at other airlines, and may very well decide to use them, but now the location thing comes into play.

From my regional airport location, AA gets me to Chicago or Charlotte, none of which are a joy to go through, also DFW, but makes for a much longer trip to Europe. United gets me Chicago (again), or going the wrong way to Denver, again, a long way to get to Europe.

Delta though gets me to Minneapolis or Detroit, both fine airports to transit through, and arrive back at. Atlanta is also an option, and trips through there have been fine. Basically my transit airport makes a big difference.

But, if the price is cheap enough, and one serves my destination better, I can deal with some inconvenience.

Charlotte to Newark to Vienna on United
Raleigh to Paris to Vienna on AA
Charlotte to Frankfurt to Vienna on Delta

I fly at least 3x a year via either FRA or MUC or CPH - I don't see a non-stop flight option to Vienna here, only via Newark to Vienna? Personally, I NEVER transit in the US, it's too risky when you return to the states, you have to go through immigration, collect your luggage if checked, and put your suitcase on the next conveyer belt before getting to your connecting gate. We've missed too many flights out of Newark, never again! (If interested, take a look at late departures, last I looked, Newark held the US title.)

One slight wrinkle - FRA is very busy, often bussed to terminal, then a looooong walk to connection. So, given your particular options, I would vote for Delta via Paris, but check with others who fly this route. (I see someone else said Paris is dreadful for connecting.... ah well.) Good luck and let us know what you choose!

We were connecting in Frankfurt (from Tel Aviv) and flying into Dulles. American Airways couldn't get our plane loaded promptly or anywhere near to planned departure.

We got into Dulles and our connecting flight to Huntsville had left. All Huntsville flights the next two days were full. They put us up for the night and put us on a plane to Atlanta. We had to rent a car (our cost) and drive 200 miles to Huntsville.

American Airways only flies mid size jets into Huntsville. If they'd been flying full size jets, chances are we'd have a way home.

Delta flies full size jets into our home city, and their service level internationally is just superior. Future international flights will be with Delta thru Atlanta.

In retirement, we seldom fly domestically--or on United.

You don't mention the connecting times for the three options - for me that would be the deciding factor. If Newark to Vienna is on Austrian, and the connection in Newark was acceptable, that would be my choice.

I will pay extra not to connect through Paris, but have had to fly into or through CDG twice in the last two years, once back in October. EVERY TIME is the nightmare I remembered or worse. Anything less than a 2 hour connection there is not something I would book voluntarily.

I am not a fan of United, but since they partner with Lufthansa, we often end up with them. If you get a Lufthansa flight, great. If it's a United flight, it's hit or miss.

We also fly KLM / Delta frequently flying into and out of Atlanta, and I find KLM fine but not great (prefer them to United re: customer service), Delta good, and Schiphol a great airport.

I haven't flown through Ireland or the UK in some time, but if you fly through London, pay attention to which airport. Heathrow is fine but SPRAWLY. It takes time to get anywhere.

I generally find there is little to choose between the airlines with only United being on my negative list.

I have also started looking at the types of planes / manufacturers recently. If it's a European airline I worry less. No absolutes for me, but it is sometimes a factor in deciding which airline I prefer.

We have flown on all three airlines, as well as some of the partners of each.

I would rate Delta the highest, next United, next AA.
For partners, we very much like Delta's partners Air France, KLM, Korean Air Lines and the Virgin lines.

My experience on Delta is that they provide superior service, but at a higher price than AA and/or BA.

That depends on where you fly from. I almost always fly Delta and I have never paid more than $1000 (usually less) for a Main Cabin RT or MC transatlantic flight.

My vote would be Delta with the Frankfurt layover. I like to avoid CDG if at all possible. Schiphol is nicer than Frankfurt, but I'd choose in favor of Delta if at all possible.

Charlotte to Frankfurt to Vienna on Delta.

That would be my choice. If there is a snag such as a late / missed connection, at least you'll be in Frankfurt which is a lot closer than Paris. Even if you had to shift gears and take a train for the last leg. Never had a problem with Delta service.

One’s choices are obviously dictated by city of origin and destination. When we lived in the Bay Area, we had more possibilities than we do now. Our absolutely worst experience traveling internationally was on Lufthansa (from and back to sfo), and I consequently try to avoid them. Horrible food, broken seat, unhelpful f.a.s. Turkish, part of the same alliance, was great.
Good experiences on Delta and affiliates.. Mixed bag on UA.
On our most recent trip, we used AA (from pdx) and BA from lhr to fco. Changed at dfw for return. It was terrific. We popped for business class. Spending our children’s inheritance

That depends on where you fly from. I almost always fly Delta and I have never paid more than $1000 (usually less) for a Main Cabin RT or MC transatlantic flight.

Very true, and also highly dependent upon the class of service. For better or worse we usually fly out of LAX, and we're now business class only. Other US gateways and classes of service will give different answers.

You don't mention the connecting times for the three options - for me
that would be the deciding factor.

^This. Plus how many choices of onward flights you would have from that airport to Vienna if you missed your connection. I myself would avoid CDG just based on the horror stories I have heard from friends recently, but if the connection time was long enough (more than 3 hrs) I might do it.

Maybe I missed it, but when are you flying? Some airports have more difficulties in poor weather. You can also look at recent flight timeliness on various websites (e.g., Flightaware) to see if a route is chronically late. I also wouldn't pick an airline for the food, any of those choices is going to have mediocre at best choices. Too bad you can't fly Korean Air, I did have some really great nibbles on a flight to Asia :)

Delta has a direct flight from Atlanta to Munich. Munich would be superior to Frankfurt and closer to Vienna. If fact you would take the train to Salzburg, see that wonderful city, then train on to Vienna.

For comparing prices, use Kayak.com

I have mixed feelings about the question of whether to change in over here, before your trans-Atlantic flight, or whether to change when you get to Europe. On my first trip to Europe (1987), I flew to Brussels with changes in both Boston and London. The Boston change was fairly painless; the London one, not so much. We spent hours in the international lounge at Heathrow in what for us was the middle of the night. It was difficult to stay awake and not miss our connecting flight to Brussels.

So, do you want to change in the US, when you are fresh and familiar with the language, but your flight options if you miss your connecting flight to Europe are limited, or in Europe, when you are jet lagged and don't understand the language, but you have far more options for connecting flights that day. Seems like six of one, half dozen of the other.

Fortunately, since 1987, I've never had a worry about that. I have always gone to Germany (FRA or MUC) and it's mostly been on Lufthansa (my preferred airline) and a lot of flights have been on a non-stop flight (Lufthansa) from Denver. I've had other flights on NWA (now Delta) from Detroit, USAir (now American) from Philly, and United, although the United flight was booked with United to EWR, but the trans-Atlantic leg was Lufthansa.

A few years ago, I took my partner to Germany using United point (earned mostly on Lufthansa flights). Because we were using points, we had few alternatives, and although we did fly Lufthansa over we had to fly United back. She was very impressed (depressed) with the difference in quality between United (poor) and Lufthansa (good) service. Since then she insisted we only fly Lufthansa; no more United.

So, looking at your options, United via EWR to Vienna, although I would normally eschew United, only the Charlotte to Newark leg is United, a three-star airline. The Newark to Vienna leg is on Austrian Air, a four-star airline, at least a cut above United. Then the good and the bad. The good, you'll have plenty of time to make the connection in Newark; the bad, you'll have plenty of time, 8 hours, to make the connection in Newark, at least from the only connection I find on the United website.

For the Delta option, in FRA Delta uses the Terminal 2, where both D and E gates are in the same building. You'll still have to go through immigration, and maybe security after immigration, but everything is in the same building.

As for the connection through Paris, I don't know anything about it, and I don't want to know.

I don't have an answer to the question, but I just want to say I would gladly pay double if I could be guaranteed no flight delays, or cancellations, or lost luggage. Air travel from the US to Europe and back is an exhausting nightmare.