April 2017, connections to and from Japan

[Damaris1900]

I have a couple of questions for the experts on the Cruise Air forum regarding the best way to schedule our flights for this coming April.

 

We will be joining a Tauck small ship cruise/tour that will begin in Kyoto and end in Tokyo. Our arriving flight will be into Osaka (KIX), and our departing flight will be out of one of the Tokyo airports, most likely NRT.

 

Here is my issue #1:

We do not live in a city (ABQ) that is a hub for any airline, and connections in general are usually awful. The two most likely carriers are United or American, and we have FF miles with both of those, although we are not planning on booking these tickets with miles. There is a morning flight from ABQ to SFO but the connecting flight to KIX involves a layover of only 1hr 26min, which makes me very, very nervous.

 

The AA option goes through LAX and involves a 5-6 hour layover, which is safer, but is definitely a long time to be hanging around, and the LAX to KIX leg is on JAL rather than AA.

 

We had also thought about flying in to SFO the day before and catching the United 11:15AM SFO->KIX flight, but are not sure if that would be a problem in any way, aside from the probable added expense for a one-way ticket.

 

Does anyone have any thoughts on the different airlines I've mentioned, or advice concerning connection times or logistics?

 

Issue #2:

 

There seem to be 3 different options for the return trip, one of which returns through LAX, one through SFO, and one through DFW. My concern is that the one that returns through DFW has a layover time of about 2 hours, which concerns me since we will have to go through Immigrations and Customs--although we do have Global Entry. We just returned from a trip to Europe and entered the US in Denver, and while Immigrations/Customs was a breeze, the security lines afterwards took forever.

 

Does anyone have any advice regarding the amount of time we should allow between our incoming and outgoing flights, and which port of entry is generally quicker and more efficient to get through?

 

I appreciate any input or advice!

[Kamloops50]

I have a couple of questions for the experts on the Cruise Air forum regarding the best way to schedule our flights for this coming April.

 

We will be joining a Tauck small ship cruise/tour that will begin in Kyoto and end in Tokyo. Our arriving flight will be into Osaka (KIX), and our departing flight will be out of one of the Tokyo airports, most likely NRT.

 

Here is my issue #1:

We do not live in a city (ABQ) that is a hub for any airline, and connections in general are usually awful. The two most likely carriers are United or American, and we have FF miles with both of those, although we are not planning on booking these tickets with miles. There is a morning flight from ABQ to SFO but the connecting flight to KIX involves a layover of only 1hr 26min, which makes me very, very nervous.

 

The AA option goes through LAX and involves a 5-6 hour layover, which is safer, but is definitely a long time to be hanging around, and the LAX to KIX leg is on JAL rather than AA.

 

We had also thought about flying in to SFO the day before and catching the United 11:15AM SFO->KIX flight, but are not sure if that would be a problem in any way, aside from the probable added expense for a one-way ticket.

 

Does anyone have any thoughts on the different airlines I've mentioned, or advice concerning connection times or logistics?

 

Issue #2:

 

There seem to be 3 different options for the return trip, one of which returns through LAX, one through SFO, and one through DFW. My concern is that the one that returns through DFW has a layover time of about 2 hours, which concerns me since we will have to go through Immigrations and Customs--although we do have Global Entry. We just returned from a trip to Europe and entered the US in Denver, and while Immigrations/Customs was a breeze, the security lines afterwards took forever.

 

Does anyone have any advice regarding the amount of time we should allow between our incoming and outgoing flights, and which port of entry is generally quicker and more efficient to get through?

 

I appreciate any input or advice!

 

I always go by the time that the airlines recommend. If your transferring to the same airline you won't have any issues. If you tickets thru the airline. Your original flight is late into SFO . The airline is responsible to get you to your final destination. I've had confections as short as 40 minutes reduced to 15 minutes because of delays. Still made the connection.

Ultimately the airline has to get you to the final destination in reasonable time.

[CruiserBruce]

Issue #2- 2 hours in DFW is fine, particularly as you have GE.

 

Issue #1- when is this trip? I would be OK with 1:26 at SFO if in the summer. Winter would be another issue.

[slidergirl]

Did you look at the schedules for any of the airlines which are in the alliances with UA and AA? Or, are they already listed a codeshares when you searched? Just trying to throw out something to look at - you could buy and still get your miles.

[RickT]

I always go by the time that the airlines recommend. If your transferring to the same airline you won't have any issues. If you tickets thru the airline. Your original flight is late into SFO . The airline is responsible to get you to your final destination. I've had confections as short as 40 minutes reduced to 15 minutes because of delays. Still made the connection.

Ultimately the airline has to get you to the final destination in reasonable time.

 

The OP doesn't say if they are flying in a day or two prior to the cruise. That said, no way do I accept many of the short connection times offered by airlines unless there are plenty of Plan B's to get me to my destination. I've had 90 minute connections become extremely tight due to late arrival and terminal changes. Relying on the airline to get you to your destination "in a reasonable time" is great if you have lots of time. A one day delay could throw the OP's travel plans out the window.

 

When in doubt or concerned, better to have a long layover than one that is too short.

[Damaris1900]

I always go by the time that the airlines recommend. If your transferring to the same airline you won't have any issues. If you tickets thru the airline. Your original flight is late into SFO . The airline is responsible to get you to your final destination. I've had confections as short as 40 minutes reduced to 15 minutes because of delays. Still made the connection.

Ultimately the airline has to get you to the final destination in reasonable time.

 

I agree that this is what happens most of the time, but my concern is that if our flight from ABQ into SFO is even a little late, and if there is a terminal change, we might end up missing the connection. I'm sure United would make sure that we got to our destination, in this case Osaka, but the question is when?

[FlyerTalker]

Picking a random day in April, I see that none of the one-connection options looks really great. However, I have one other possibility that would hit my sweet spot. Take AA to LAX in the evening (8:24p), then connect to CX to Hong Kong. You will be ready for sleeping on the flight across the ocean (either 11:55p or 12:55a departure from LAX), then have a choice of 3:30 to 5:45 in connection at HKG. If in business, you will be timed right for the TPAC flight, time to enjoy the CX lounges in HKG and then arrive at KIX in the afternoon, when your hotel room will be available. Lots of connect time built in and CX is good, even in coach (as they may not have your 777 reconfigured into 10 across by then).

 

Just a thought. Play around with ITA using the time-bars setting to visually see what your flights and connections look like.

[Damaris1900]

Issue #2- 2 hours in DFW is fine, particularly as you have GE.

 

Issue #1- when is this trip? I would be OK with 1:26 at SFO if in the summer. Winter would be another issue.

 

Thanks for the feedback on the connection at DFW, that's very helpful.

 

The trip is in April of 2017. What is your opinion of the likelihood of weather related problems in April at SFO?

Edited October 14, 2016 by Damaris1900

[Damaris1900]

slidergirl, from what I can tell, most of them seem to be listed as codeshares, but that is a good thought, thanks!

 

RickT, we are flying in a day early for exactly that reason. We just got back from a river cruise that we were supposed to fly in 2 days early for, and due to bad weather in Chicago, we ended up flying in 24 hours later than originally scheduled. If we had not built in extra time on the front end, we would have missed the start of our cruise. I agree with you on the tight connections--they always make me very nervous.

 

FlyerTalker, yeah, the connections aren't great, but that is a very interesting idea! I'll spend some time with the ITA software and see what I can come up with and then do some price/time comparisons. ABQ is just a terrible place to have as your starting point when you are dealing with international flights.

[GeezerCouple]

I have a couple of questions for the experts on the Cruise Air forum regarding the best way to schedule our flights for this coming April.

 

We will be joining a Tauck small ship cruise/tour that will begin in Kyoto and end in Tokyo. Our arriving flight will be into Osaka (KIX), and our departing flight will be out of one of the Tokyo airports, most likely NRT.

 

Here is my issue #1:

We do not live in a city (ABQ) that is a hub for any airline, and connections in general are usually awful. The two most likely carriers are United or American, and we have FF miles with both of those, although we are not planning on booking these tickets with miles. There is a morning flight from ABQ to SFO but the connecting flight to KIX involves a layover of only 1hr 26min, which makes me very, very nervous.

 

The AA option goes through LAX and involves a 5-6 hour layover, which is safer, but is definitely a long time to be hanging around, and the LAX to KIX leg is on JAL rather than AA.

 

We had also thought about flying in to SFO the day before and catching the United 11:15AM SFO->KIX flight, but are not sure if that would be a problem in any way, aside from the probable added expense for a one-way ticket.

 

Does anyone have any thoughts on the different airlines I've mentioned, or advice concerning connection times or logistics?

 

Issue #2:

 

There seem to be 3 different options for the return trip, one of which returns through LAX, one through SFO, and one through DFW. My concern is that the one that returns through DFW has a layover time of about 2 hours, which concerns me since we will have to go through Immigrations and Customs--although we do have Global Entry. We just returned from a trip to Europe and entered the US in Denver, and while Immigrations/Customs was a breeze, the security lines afterwards took forever.

 

Does anyone have any advice regarding the amount of time we should allow between our incoming and outgoing flights, and which port of entry is generally quicker and more efficient to get through?

 

I appreciate any input or advice!

 

We have a somewhat similar situation for next May, from the USA East Coast, flying to Tokyo, and then home from Osaka.

Ours is for a land trip this time, but the transportation "there and back" is the same.

 

We are using AAdvantage miles/points, premium, on AA partner airlines both directions, and get a much better value than the same itinerary on AA metal.

 

There is one really good flight (great flat beds) from JFK, on JAL, and we'd have about 1.5 hour connection. Too tight.

For one thing, there are so few premium seats that we can't imagine there would be 2 (of 8) available "the next day" if we missed that connection. And there are no comparable seats/beds until that same flight the next day.

Who knows *what* flights we'd be put on? Sure, they'd "get us to Tokyo", but when and how?

 

So we'll fly to NYC the night before, have a much more relaxing morning, with lots of time to get to that Tokyo-bound flight.

 

On the way back, we'd have an extra connection... unless we got creative.

We were really curious about Cathay Pacific premium.

We could stick with only one change of plane, but with a longer trip, by flying through Hong Kong.

We'll have a lengthy layover in HKG, but we'll be able to spend the time in what seems to be a pretty awesome Cathay first class lounge.

 

We are thinking about it as those travel days being part of the vacation, and a bit luxe. (Yeah, that might be wishful thinking?:confused:)

 

We also wanted to see IF we/our aging bodies could really be comfortable in those really long-haul flights, if in some really nice flat bed seats.

If so, we'll know we can go to other distant spots. If not, well, that would be a shame, but at least we'd know.

 

By the way, Damaris1900, we'd be much less concerned about a final tight connection en route home, once we were back in the USA.

At least then, there are likely to be lots of flights (at least to our airport).

So if that short hop between home and JFK had been on the return rather than the outbound, we wouldn't have been too worried.

[Gardyloo]

Question - are you flying in business class, premium economy or down the back?

[CruiserBruce]

Thanks for the feedback on the connection at DFW, that's very helpful.

 

The trip is in April of 2017. What is your opinion of the likelihood of weather related problems in April at SFO?

 

I wouldn't worry about a 1:26 connection in April.

[Damaris1900]

Question - are you flying in business class, premium economy or down the back?

 

We're planning on flying business class--at our age, it makes a trip that long much, much easier. ;) We're less likely to have to be scraped out of our seats at the destination.

[Damaris1900]

We have a somewhat similar situation for next May, from the USA East Coast, flying to Tokyo, and then home from Osaka.

Ours is for a land trip this time, but the transportation "there and back" is the same.

 

We are using AAdvantage miles/points, premium, on AA partner airlines both directions, and get a much better value than the same itinerary on AA metal.

 

There is one really good flight (great flat beds) from JFK, on JAL, and we'd have about 1.5 hour connection. Too tight.

For one thing, there are so few premium seats that we can't imagine there would be 2 (of 8) available "the next day" if we missed that connection. And there are no comparable seats/beds until that same flight the next day.

Who knows *what* flights we'd be put on? Sure, they'd "get us to Tokyo", but when and how?

 

So we'll fly to NYC the night before, have a much more relaxing morning, with lots of time to get to that Tokyo-bound flight.

 

On the way back, we'd have an extra connection... unless we got creative.

We were really curious about Cathay Pacific premium.

We could stick with only one change of plane, but with a longer trip, by flying through Hong Kong.

We'll have a lengthy layover in HKG, but we'll be able to spend the time in what seems to be a pretty awesome Cathay first class lounge.

 

We are thinking about it as those travel days being part of the vacation, and a bit luxe. (Yeah, that might be wishful thinking?:confused:)

 

We also wanted to see IF we/our aging bodies could really be comfortable in those really long-haul flights, if in some really nice flat bed seats.

If so, we'll know we can go to other distant spots. If not, well, that would be a shame, but at least we'd know.

 

By the way, Damaris1900, we'd be much less concerned about a final tight connection en route home, once we were back in the USA.

At least then, there are likely to be lots of flights (at least to our airport).

So if that short hop between home and JFK had been on the return rather than the outbound, we wouldn't have been too worried.

 

It sounds as though your thinking is running along very similar lines to ours. We're really tempted to fly into SFO the day before, and like you, are much less concerned about missed connections once we're back on home ground on the return. Cathay Pacific sounds wonderful, but we're nervous about the extra time both in air and waiting around during the layover in Hong Kong. I was zonked after a 10 hour flight from Frankfurt to Denver, and LAX to HKG is a lot longer than that......

[Damaris1900]

I wouldn't worry about a 1:26 connection in April.

 

That's good news, thanks!

[GeezerCouple]

We're planning on flying business class--at our age, it makes a trip that long much, much easier. ;) We're less likely to have to be scraped out of our seats at the destination.

 

Ah, if you are flying premium and have AA miles/points, check about using those on a partner airline (eg., JAL or Cathay). There is an entirely different chart for # of miles/points needed, and it's so much less than using AAdvantage miles/points on AA's own aircraft.

 

And as a bonus, the equipment and service is likely to be better, too.

 

I can't report about the equipment/service until after our return next June.

But I can definitely vouch for the much better use of those AAdvantage points when used on an international partner, premium.

 

(We agree with you. Our aging bodies can no longer sit up for umpteen hours, and even premium economy doesn't work. We end up a wreck, in back agony, plus needing a lot more time to catch up once we arrive. It was a lot easier and cheaper when we were younger...)

[FlyerTalker]

It's precisely the creaky aging bodies that actually makes the longer connects a blessing. No running through airports, plenty of time to get a shower and change of clothes in the lounge, food and drink and often more in the lounge, plus time to work into the time change. Plus, no matter how good the seat (which more and more in biz are designed for the bed rather than as a seat), it's nice to have the time on the ground where you can stretch and walk and do whatever to work out the kinks.

[waterbug123]

 

The AA option goes through LAX and involves a 5-6 hour layover, which is safer, but is definitely a long time to be hanging around, and the LAX to KIX leg is on JAL rather than AA.

 

When we flew to Rwanda this past summer we had around 6 hours at JFK before flying to AMS and on to Kigali. That can seem like a long time, but it gives you a lot of cushion in the event your flight is delayed. I wouldn't sweat it for a transcontinental trip, and since you're flying business class, you'll likely have lounge access which can make the wait much more pleasant.

 

As for JAL, do you have a particular reason you are opposed to that, or is just that it's a foreign airline and you think you should fly a US airline?

 

Ultimately the airline has to get you to the final destination in reasonable time.

 

Yes, but it's hard to define "reasonable time." It really depends on when there is a seat available to get you to your next destination. Depending on the reason for the delay and the rules and restrictions attached to your particular ticket, there are a zillion possibilities. Getting the same seat on the same airline on the same route could very easily mean waiting until the next day if the airline only flies the route once a day, which can be common with transcontinental flights. Alternatively, you might get re-routed and spend more time in the air. You might get your ticket endorsed over to another airline but keep in mind that that is less likely if the delay is weather-related as opposed to mechanical or crew related. There might be options that get you there sooner but there are no biz seats available for those options, and if you voluntarily take the downgrade you might have no recourse for getting refunded the difference.

So yes, ultimately the airline has to get you there but there may be trade-offs involved.

[Damaris1900]

It's precisely the creaky aging bodies that actually makes the longer connects a blessing. No running through airports, plenty of time to get a shower and change of clothes in the lounge, food and drink and often more in the lounge, plus time to work into the time change. Plus, no matter how good the seat (which more and more in biz are designed for the bed rather than as a seat), it's nice to have the time on the ground where you can stretch and walk and do whatever to work out the kinks.

 

These are all very good points, and I will definitely keep those in mind as we sort through our options. Having the time to shower and walk around, in particular, would go a long ways toward making a longer layover worthwhile.

[Damaris1900]

When we flew to Rwanda this past summer we had around 6 hours at JFK before flying to AMS and on to Kigali. That can seem like a long time, but it gives you a lot of cushion in the event your flight is delayed. I wouldn't sweat it for a transcontinental trip, and since you're flying business class, you'll likely have lounge access which can make the wait much more pleasant.

 

As for JAL, do you have a particular reason you are opposed to that, or is just that it's a foreign airline and you think you should fly a US airline?

 

 

 

Yes, but it's hard to define "reasonable time." It really depends on when there is a seat available to get you to your next destination. Depending on the reason for the delay and the rules and restrictions attached to your particular ticket, there are a zillion possibilities. Getting the same seat on the same airline on the same route could very easily mean waiting until the next day if the airline only flies the route once a day, which can be common with transcontinental flights. Alternatively, you might get re-routed and spend more time in the air. You might get your ticket endorsed over to another airline but keep in mind that that is less likely if the delay is weather-related as opposed to mechanical or crew related. There might be options that get you there sooner but there are no biz seats available for those options, and if you voluntarily take the downgrade you might have no recourse for getting refunded the difference.

So yes, ultimately the airline has to get you there but there may be trade-offs involved.

 

I have no objection to JAL at all--actually, from what I've heard about trans-Pacific flights, it might actually be a lot more comfortable, with better service. That's one of the things I'm interested in hearing about from people who might have traveled across the Pacific on both JAL or AA.

 

I strongly agree with your second paragraph. We have quite a bit of experience with that whole "reasonable time" thing. If you are lucky the delay is less than 24 hours. One memorable year when we were flying to Kauai around the New Year the delay was 3 days, which is why I give tight connections some serious side eye. I'll do them if I have to, but I'm always aware that things could go pear shaped very quickly.

[Kamloops50]

From Vancouver Canada to Japan. The preferred carrier is Japan Airlines or ANA. Better service than Air Canada. How only three airlines that fly direct to Japan from Vancouver. Air Canada is the worst of the three.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[Damaris1900]

Just a quick update:

 

After running every possible schedule and airline, we ended up booking with United, but flying into SFO the day before our flight to Osaka so we don't have to stress over the 1hr and 26min connection time. This will give us a chance to eat a nice dinner at one of our favorite restaurants in SFO, too:)

 

Our flight back from Tokyo into SFO will involve a fairly tight connection, but there are multiple other later flights that could get us back home, so we aren't too worried. Overall, it could have been much worse, and the price we got was one we can live with.

 

Thanks for all the help, it is much appreciated!

[TruckerDave]

If you are going to ride up front....take CX in a heart beat and not think twice. JL in two heart beats if the CX shed doesn't work. AA or UA would be at he bottom of the list of choices.

[em-sk]

From Vancouver Canada to Japan. The preferred carrier is Japan Airlines or ANA. Better service than Air Canada. How only three airlines that fly direct to Japan from Vancouver. Air Canada is the worst of the three.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

The fact ANA flies into Haneda makes it the more desirable route if heading to Tokyo. Potentially connecting to other parts. I also like the ANA in flight service. Air Canada is pretty good compared to the other North American airlines. It is been a number of years since I have been on JAL and have not been that impressed. Air Canada and JAL serve Narita. Air Canada Rouge fly into Osaka and are starting Nagoya which provides even more choice.

 

The thing with Rouge flights is the economy section is tight and not idea. The Premium Economy offering is great.

 

I am becoming a real fan of Premium Economy. It is better than Economy on most airlines but not at the same price point as International Business. Air Canada has on it on most of the fleet. The same for ANA and JAL.

[Damaris1900]

Thanks for weighing in Kamloops50, TruckerDave, and em-sk. This is really valuable information for anyone thinking about booking a flight on this route, especially from Canada, or if they are starting from a hub. One of the most frustrating things for DH and me is that for us flights into and out of our city, and the connections that are involved are usually terrible, and cancellations are just a fact of life. Our first choice probably would have been ANA, but we just could not get the schedules to work for us, and there was also a significant increase in price. Flying Cathay Air would have added two more stops onto both the westbound and eastbound portions of the trip, as well as a significant increase in transit time--I think it was around 10 hours each way; the pricing was awful for us, too, just about double. So, while the quality of the airline and service is important, it is not important enough for me to pay that much more, and add that much more transit time to the trip. Someone else might make a different calculation--it's all about hitting that happy medium!