Choice of SQ 12 or SQ 2

[LionCity]

I have been trying to figure out which flight to consider as I am intending to fly to West Coast of the United States. My intention is to springboard from one of the two cities to go to Colorada.

I have never been on SQ 12. Not sure what you think of this flight as compared to SQ 2. I don't have huge preference whether it is the space bed or the new business class seat.

Comparatively is SFO or LAX more friendly to visitor in terms of immigration queue, attitude of the immigration/customer and connection flight or both just the same. I have not been to LAX for a long time (ten years ago using UA via an Asian city and SQ flight via Taipei) and my last memory wasn't that pleasant.

Any opinions will be appreciated.

[HUGE AL]

If you're only comparing the welcome committee, go with SFO.

[StarG]

For me, new Business Class > SpaceBed by far (noted that you don't have much of a preference in this).
IMHO, SFO is a much friendlier airport to arrive and connect in.

[zvezda]

I can't argue with StarG, who sums up my sentiments exactly. I would just add that my first choice, would be the SIN-LAX nonstop if my only criteria were getting to the US west coast on SQ in business class. Personally, I would choose SQ2 over SQ12 because I like to spend the day in HKG, so I normally take a morning SIN-HKG flight and then connect to SQ2. I'll also note that the 777-300ER is less turbulent than the JumboJet.

[Dickson]

My take :

In terms of connection to Colorado, LAX is a much better choice with far higher frequency of internal flights to Denver. SQ12 arrives late morning, if you're just transiting, you can get into Denver by the end of the day.

SQ12 also operates the B747 -- if you've enough mileage, you can do a redemption to First Class (one of the very few sectors left which still does not operate B777 where you have to use ridiculous double miles to do an upgrade).

One thing I don't like about SQ12 flight (apart from Spacebed in Biz class) is the relatively short flight time from Narita to LAX. You barely get enough rest.

SQ2 arrives into SFO in the evening, so from a transit perspective, you'll need to stay overnight to catch any connection to Denver. It uses the newer B777 so the Biz Class and Y seats are more comfortable than SQ12. You do get adequate sleep on the flight from HK to SFO.

Conclusion ?

For me, if I'm doing an actual stopover in the West Coast, I normally take SQ2. I find that I really need a proper rest on the plane so I don't doze off when I drive the rented car in SFO.

If I'm on a transit, I prefer either SQ16 or SQ12, so I can get into my end destination within the same day. SQ16 allows you a slightly longer rest than SQ12 because the SEL-SFO flight time is longer. And its also the more comfortable B777.

But the connectivity at LAX is far better than SFO and I like the fact that if I get in earlier or my flight arrival is delayed, there are other flights I can try my luck at catching at LAX.

[GoldenPigeon]

you may want to consider SQ 2!
SFO Rox!!

[LionCity]

Thanks everyone for your valuable input....SFO here I come!

[9V-JKL]

Thanks everyone for your valuable input....SFO here I come!

Echoing the others. SFO is a breeze compared to the LAX

[crazycrab955]

I'll also note that the 777-300ER is less turbulent than the JumboJet.

Interesting opinion. I haven't experienced much of a difference either way, but my good friend (captain for SQ) has quite a bit of stick time in both and feels strongly that the 744 is a smoother ride in turbulence than the 777.

To the OP: SFO is a much more pleasant airport for transit than LAX, especially with the easy connectivity between Intl G Terminal and the north terminal (UA domestic).

[zvezda]

I haven't experienced much of a difference either way, but my good friend (captain for SQ) has quite a bit of stick time in both and feels strongly that the 744 is a smoother ride in turbulence than the 777.

I've got over a million miles in each and I can't say that I can tell the difference. However, Boeing say that the 777 is better in turbulence due to anti-turbulence programming in the 777's fly-by-wire that the 747 doesn't have. I believe Boeing have the data.

Boeing also say that the 787 will be even smoother yet. I'm sure the A350 will be too, as Airbus have had similar anti-turbulence systems since the A320 -- which is one of the reasons I prefer the A320 to the 737 (though cabin width is the main reason).

[HUGE AL]

II'll also note that the 777-300ER is less turbulent than the JumboJet.

I've got over a million miles in each and I can't say that I can tell the difference. However, Boeing say that the 777 is better in turbulence due to anti-turbulence programming in the 777's fly-by-wire that the 747 doesn't have. I believe Boeing have the data.

Boeing also say that the 787 will be even smoother yet. I'm sure the A350 will be too, as Airbus have had similar anti-turbulence systems since the A320 -- which is one of the reasons I prefer the A320 to the 737 (though cabin width is the main reason).

All I know is the last time I took SQ12 we shook the ENTIRE flight. Eating and drinking were a chore...not to mention getting any sleep whatsoever. Although a certain Contender celeb had no problem chowing.

[sqlove]

Echoing the others. SFO is a breeze compared to the LAX

SFO. Tom Bradley in LAX is a mess, especially when you have a connecting flight. inter-terminal is by bus and its really really bad.

[zvezda]

All I know is the last time I took SQ12 we shook the ENTIRE flight. Eating and drinking were a chore...not to mention getting any sleep whatsoever. Although a certain Contender celeb had no problem chowing.

I continue eating when everyone else stops due to turbulence. Light and noise interfere with my sleep, but turbulence doesn't. YMMV.

[flyKL]

SFO. Tom Bradley in LAX is a mess, especially when you have a connecting flight. inter-terminal is by bus and its really really bad.

Yes indeed, I took Frontier Airlines from Denver and connected to MH back to KUL, and changing terminals is a mess, unlike Changi. If only LAX had skytrains

[milehighj]

If only LAX had skytrains

I think hardware like Skytrains is the least of anyone's worries. It's all about getting the basic software right - efficient immigration, baggage claim, check-in, transit processes - before getting into other things.

The last time I flew thru LAX (thankfully 2 years ago now), I arrived from MEX at a domestic gate, was bussed to TBIT to clear immigration (along with several loads of 744s from Asia), then ended up walking back to International check-in to catch my TG flight back to BKK. A lot of basic efficiencies to be sorted there before we start talking about Skytrains...