Philippine Airlines

Hi all,
I recently booked a trip from Toronto to Manila (via Vancouver) with Philippine Airlines. Can anyone who has flown internationally with them give me a heads up on what to expect? I have never flown with them before and it would be good to have an idea how they compare to other airlines since I'll be spending nearly 40 hrs with them this month. Thanks in advance! Im sooo excited to be heading back to the Philippines, even if it's only for a few weeks!

they're rubbish.

and the Terminal where the plane will land, Terminal 2 in Manila, is rubbish too.

don't forget to claim your complimentary meal voucher if you have a layover of over 4 hours, that isn't anything particular to PAL it's what every airline should do. So keep your boarding pass.

I went from LAX to Manila and return twice on PAL with no issues. Timely flights, comfortable aircraft and good service. Can't compare because I did not use another airline yet for this trip.

As far as I am aware there is no requirement for airlines to feed you on lay overs that are ticketed only when you have missed a flight or it is cancelled.

There are a few airlines that will give you a hotel and food if your layover is 8 or more hours and there was not an earlier connection.

every time I've had a layover longer than 4 hours, and this is going back at least 12 years, when I've gone their desk at the intermediate airport and asked for a meal voucher, I've got one.

sometimes, like at Kuwait, they are really tight with it and just give you a snack voucher instead of a full meal one. Regardless of what time of day or night it is (I had 4 lengthy layovers there).

but it can depend on the time of day, what kind of meal voucher you get. When it's early morning you might get a mere breakfast or smaller value voucher whereas at dinner time you might get a bigger one.

the last time I got one, at Abu Dhabi, the meal voucher they have me, if I'd bought the same meal in cash at the same restaurant, it would have cost me $20.

some airlines, like Emirates, actually advertise it, and they have a special desk at the airport in Dubai where people can claim their meal vouchers and you don't have to go to the general airline desk like you have to usually.

PAL gave me a meal voucher too at Abu Dhabi, even though it was a codeshare with Etihad.

once I had a flight with Emirates that was delayed and meant I missed my connection to Manila, they put me up for 18 hours in a nice hotel in Dubai with free meals, but that's different and nothing to do with the meal vouchers you get if you ask for them when a layover is over 4 hours.

a couple of years ago I was annoyed because I had a layover that was 3 hours 50 minutes. I'd have much preferred it to be 4 hours and 5 minutes.

I have flown Philippine Airlines once internationally since it was several hundred dollars cheaper and several hours faster than other airlines. It was so bad I won't fly them again...

It's a lo-ong flight on, probably an older aircraft on not a very good airline with better cabin crew than they deserve, average food and below average IFE. Bring a good book, or a Kindle and snacks for the flight. Check in early (or book online) to get the seat you want (in Economy I prefer and aisle seat in the middle block away from the toilets). It won't make much difference where you sit in terms of getting through MNL - you'll still end up waiting for your bags. Long haul time reliability should be reasonable but I wouldn't plan a domestic connection shorter than 4 or 5 hours and preferably the next day - you'll need the break...

Flying into Manila you arrive at Terminal 2 which is a zoo of a place and operating at several times its design capacity, but there's nothing you can do about it apart from not being in a hurry, chill and just go with the flow... Plan 1 1/2 hrs to exit the terminal after landing and if it's less then you've done pretty well.

PAL are better than they were a few years ago and not as good as the early 80's. They tend to pitch to the cheaper end of the market and you get what you pay for - usually. Mrs norrie likes 'em better than I do - I don't do 10hr+ sectors as well as I used to.

Look at www.seatguru.com for all relevant information for your particular flight, i.e. entertainment, seat-map, seat-pitch, best / preferred seats, meals, WiFi etc etc plus some passenger reviews.

when I did that codeshare with Etihad on the UK-UAE leg and then Philippines Airlines on the UAE-Manila one, the difference was stark. It was almost like getting off an airconditioned bus and then getting on to a jeepney the difference was that much. It's not like I wouldn't ever fly with them again as I don't really care what a plane is like, my attitude is just to bear with it in any circumstances but I certainly wouldn't seek them out and even if they were a bit less than another airline I still wouldn't buy it.

TBH if you're flying Economy class, you should view your flight as a means to an end, getting from A to B to start a wonderful trip you're looking forward to. No matter which airline you pick, you're going to get fed, movies, drinks and a seat that's impossible to sleep in. It's all much of a muchness.
Only if you're flying Business / First class then the quality of service you get will vary wildly and selection of airline is key to get the best value for money.

If I was flying Economy class I would pick the most direct route / shortest journey time and most convenient that I could afford. If it turns out to be Philippine Airlines then so be it.

The PAL flight I got from Abu Dhabi to Manila didn't have any in-flight entertainment at all. Why should they care. Most of the passengers weren't from places like Sydney or LA, but OFW cattle.

3 years. PAL are not on a par with the other SEAsian national flagship airlines like Singapore, Malaysian, or Thai. They're miles behind them. That's obvious.

although I stress that like friendly-checkngirl has pointed out, that when they happen to be a pretty rubbish airline, like PAL is, then that does not make much difference to me.

As anyone can see, the flight OP is taking is operated by a Boeing 777-300 with full in-flight entertainment with 9" seat-back mounted screens in Economy class. I think on a travel forum any advice given should be current otherwise what's the point.

On a 13hr flight from Vancouver I'd be more interested in the quality of the seat cushion, rather than a bit of glass on the back of the seat - 'cos, upon arrival, that's the bit that's going to have to be surgically removed from my backside... on any 13hr flight, you're pretty much movie'd and meal'd out... It doesn't matter what's on (you've seen it), or what they serve you (you haven't been able to digest the last one) - you just want it to end - soon...

Flying from Toronto the OP is probably flying codeshare with WestJet to Vancouver... NOW we're talking cattle class..

OP - after that trip MNL is gonna feel like a joyous experience indeed...

All airlines change the planes from time to time not just PAL. Last summer I was lucky as Qatar put the Dreamliner on my Manchester Doah legs.

#18 - Absolutely NO chance of Dreamliners on a PAL codeshare Toronto - Vancouver - Manila... Dream-ON-Liners maybe?... I'd be more looking forward to something which left and arrived anywhere close to on-time, a moderately comfortable seat, pleasant cabin crew, drinkable wine, somewhere to charge my tab, no screaming kids and fully functioning toilets - Anything else I'd put down as a bonus....

As anyone can see, the flight OP is taking is operated by a Boeing 777-300 with full in-flight entertainment with 9" seat-back mounted screens in Economy class. I think on a travel forum any advice given should be current otherwise what's the point.

The point that you may not have noticed is that PAL changes planes to suit their needs so what is showing now might not be the plane on the day

airlines are not uniform and have different standards on different routes. Once I took a Royal Jordanian to Bangkok via Amman. London-Amman it was OK - it was like one of the decent Gulf airlines, but Amman-Bangkok - not one of their top-notch destinations, everything went sharply downhill. PAL are going to be the same, like one airllne when they carry Americans from LA to Manila, and another airline completely when they are carrying OFW's back from their two years on the Gulf.

We use PAL occasionally from Bangkok to Manila, because they tend to be the same price as Cebu Pacific but with food and luggage included. I made the comment to my partner that the flight was ok from Bangkok, but that's a relatively short hop of 3.5 hours, I wouldn't want to fly PAL long haul...he agreed completely. The service was very inconsistent, they only had 4 blankets for the whole economy section of the plane and you can't choose your meal (if you are veggie for example) online, you have to call PAL and request a special meal...seriously, calling in this day and age?! The food was edible, it was just ok but that's the majority of airline food.

The app BigJim is talking about does work - we tried it out last month when we flew with PAL last, but it will suck the battery on your device, so unless there are in-seat chargers it mightn't be any good (not sure on the bigger planes, as FCG says, check seatguru for that).

The point that you may not have noticed is that PAL changes planes to suit their needs so what is showing now might not be the plane on the day.

All airlines change the planes from time to time not just PAL. Last summer I was lucky as Qatar put the Dreamliner on my Manchester Doah legs.

#18 - Absolutely NO chance of Dreamliners on a PAL codeshare Toronto - Vancouver - Manila... Dream-ON-Liners maybe?...

Future timetables / schedules may be changed but last minute aircraft changes from scheduled are always a last resort. Airlines don't have several planes standing around idly, it's not viable and makes no financial sense. All aircraft have planned routes days in advance and flying anywhere have to come back with yet another load of booked passengers, you can't simply "swop" aircraft types without causing problems down the line. Cock-pit and cabin crew are not a one size fits all, they can't just get into any plane and fly it, they are trained for specific aircraft types. You have no idea of the logistical implications involved when the operating aircraft type has to be changed, it's not done on a whim as you seem to be trying to imply. This is why we have schedules and this is why all airlines strive to maintain their schedules, nobody wishes to work in an enviroment of chaos.

I don't need a crystal ball to be reasonably sure that the scheduled Boeing 777-300 will operate OPs Vancouver to Manila route. I don't get what you have to gain with all this scaremongering.

Who's scaremongering? The OP asked about the flights: one flight is with a budget carrier who's trying to be a long haul operator and the other is with an airline who are fine around SE Asia but struggle to match their neighbours long haul. Neither are great airlines, but you get what you pay for. I'm with loubbylou - PAL's fine around SE Asia, a lot better than they were a few years ago, competitively priced, but long haul there are better choices for not a lot more money.

Last time I flew from Canada to Manila I went Cathay Pacific - and very pleasant it was too.... but I was spending the company's money not mine.

#18 - Absolutely NO chance of Dreamliners on a PAL codeshare Toronto - Vancouver - Manila... Dream-ON-Liners maybe?..

That's scaremongering - trying to deny the credibility of published schedules.
You clearly dislike PAL, when was your last long-haul flight with them that has caused such an outburst of negative comments? Why was it so much more dreadful than any other Economy seat?

#24 - What published schedule? Neither WestJet nor Philippine Airlines currently operate, or intend to buy, the Boeing 787 freqently referred to as The Dreamliner, so the chances of the OP flying it on their forthcoming trip to MNL is approximately zero... I believe WestJet operate 737/767 and PAL probably run the 777ER to Vancouver, but I'm not sure... and some of them are getting rather old.

I don't dislike PAL at all.... I last flew them long haul LHR-MNL-LHR about 18 months ago, also on a 777ER... I didn't like the flight much (13hrs non stop or whatever is too much for my old bones). Mrs norrie and our youngest daughter flew them again last summer. In the past year I've flown PAL to HKG, SIN and several times to BKK, 2 weeks ago being the latest. I fly between Europe and SE Asia 4 to 6 times a year and I prefer to route through the Gulf, break the journey, and enjoy a better flight experience, (for me and the majority of others apparently, given the huge passenger numbers involved) than that provided by PAL - and it's got very little to do with one Economy seat versus another and more to do with breaking the journey, better baggage allowance, miles you can actually use etc.

By far the worst part of PAL is the fact they use MNL T2... 3hrs flight time from BKK and the thick end of 2 1/2 hrs to get out of that dump of a terminal...

No, there's plenty airlines I dislike more than Philippine Airlines... plenty - usually operators who've come worryingly close to killing me over the years.

My apologies, I misread your initial comment about the Dreamliner. Although it's a moot point in view of its spontaneously exploding batteries, why anyone would have a preference for it.

I'm not sure what relevance of preferred routings from Europe or breaking up journeys has to do with OP flying over miles of ocean from Canada. You've lost me there but nevermind.

Due to a variety of shortcomings in the aviation industry, PAL was blacklisted and had a 5 year ban from flying into Europe. This ban was only lifted in June 2015. This is welcome reassuring news for OP as it demonstrates a recent conformation to safety and service standards and regulations.

For me in business class with Qatar compared to the Airbus there was a massive difference in quality with the Dreamliner

#26 - Apologies accepted. Passengers like the Dreamliner since it can fly non stop as far as the longest range 777, is significantly quieter, and the cabin pressure is higher with higher humidity so you don't feel like hammered sh1t after 12 hours... Airlines like them 'cos they're cheaper to buy and more fuel efficient than the 777ER, hence more profitable, but there's not many second-hand ones on the market. No passenger has been killed or injured as a result of 787 battery problems - and they've never 'exploded', otherwise hundreds of passengers would have died. The aircraft is completely safe to fly otherwise it wouldn't be flying, and I haven't met anyone who's flown the 787 who didn't like it.

Sorry I lost you - you asked me about long haul flights that I'd taken on PAL and I told you... It's relevant to the post since it's likely to be the same aircraft type the OP will fly from Canada. Flying across the Pacific or across Russia - long haul PAL ain't the best experience in the air... believe me there's better, otherwise PAL would have a much higher passenger approval than they currently enjoy.

You're correct that PAL was banned from the EU, but never at any time from North America, Australia, Middle East or a dozen countries in Asia. Odd that... 'safe' enough to fly to LAX but sadly not 'safe' enough for LHR?... Hmmm.

In my case they were changed after I booked for a one month period hence the bonus but now they are permanently rostered.

#27. Think you're right bigal1... really looking forward to trying it. Boeing took a big gamble with smaller but lo-ong range planes as opposed to the Airbus concept of jamming as many passengers as possible into an aluminium tube. I prefer the A380 to the B777 (quieter) but looking forward to the B787 experience.

OP - you'll be fine with PAL, which used to stand for Plane Always Late, but not any more - they're trying hard.. but as I said - take a good book. You've seen the adverts; "It's more fun in the Philippines..." ? Well not in Manila Airport Terminal 2 it's not....

How many they cram in is more to do with the airline than the manufacturer. Retro fitting of old planes is expensive and time consuming hence the new and improved business classes. Don't do long haul economy but not so much of a difference between the new and old apart from leg room and some carriers sticking an extra seat in a row

I flew business class with Malaysian and Garuda in 737 or A320s and far more comfortable and spacious than most European main carriers.

Same same but slightly different. Don't listen to them OP, it's not worth worrying about ;-)

Hi

I fly with Pal from the US West Coast(California) to the PHils. regularly and I've had no problems with them. I also fly with Delta ,of the two I prefer Pal. Pals legroom was bigger , Delta packs you like sardines now and the Flight attendants at Pal were friendlier and more attentive. Pal has newer planes now that do have the in flight entertainment system. I would listen to friendly_checkingirl here as she has the more sensible answers. The other ones have never taken Pal or are only basing their opinions from short haul flights or hearsays. Another advantage is that they usually fly directly to Manila saving you time and hassle.

#33... Comparing PAL favourably to the likes of Delta is not exactly a resounding endorsement for either... Another fine airline run into the ditch...

I've flown PAL several times a year since 1980. I fly in and out of Manila 6 or 7 times a year, about half the trips with PAL. Many other regular posters on TT similarly have extensive experience of flying every conceivable route into Manila and their comments are just as valid as yours... I'm happy that the flight attendants are friendly but please keep your prejudicial comments about the veracity of other posters to yourself.

Why would anybody who isn't an attention seeker want the flight attendants to be especially friendly anyway. You just want them to serve the food and drinks without making a mess of it and very rarely for anything else at all.

No callippo, they also need to keep the toilets clean (usually the job for the more junior cabin crew members... ) They also need to act professionally in the event of an emergency... And if it was a toss up between PAL and Delta I know which one I'd put more faith in during an emergency.. I'll give you a clue - it's not PAL...

It's a basic part of customer service to try and treat customers as individuals and no one is asking them to be over friendly but in my time I have come across some real pains. On long haul I have had many interesting conversations with cabin crew when most of the plane is asleep.

It is just the same as a nice smile and a good morning at check in

speak for yourself , friendly people especially in customer service oriented fields, are nicer to be around with, that's probably why nobody likes you.

Your faith and judgement is not based on subjective scientific facts but on emotions and your own personal biases.

It's a basic part of customer service to try and treat customers as individuals and no one is asking them to be over friendly but in my time I have come across some real pains.

don't know why it is, but on American airlines, United, Delta etc I have noticed the cabin crew do tend to be kind of grouchy which is noticeable because you don't get that with other kinds of services in the US where the waiters in restaurants, etc are not like that at all. It's only on airlines.

but every other airline ,the cabin crews are kind of interchangeable, there's just no difference between them once you see past the kind of different silly different coloured clothing they might wear. They should be like these, not over-friendly, but non-hostile prison officers more than effusive interlocuters, their role is very elemental, they are there to ensure you don't starve to death and don't die in some unfortunate accident, not to engage you in a conversation with you about the relative merits of Proust or EM Forster.

#39 ... from your earlier post... "Delta packs you like sardines now and the flight attendants at PAL were friendlier and more attentive. PAL have .... the in flight entertainment system"... Yes an excellent, non emotional and unbiased assessment of how a PAL cabin crew are likely to react in an emergency... " You'll be telling us next that average age, FAA mandated training, experience and salary have nothing to do with effective emergency response between airlines such as Delta and PAL. Spare us...

In many hundreds of flights with Asian airlines over the years (including PAL) I've seen their own safety rules violated, poor attitudes from supervisors who should know better and cabin crews not even in control of their passengers. This does not bode well for their ability to act correctly in the event of an emergency. The same attitudes do not generally exist in airlines such as Qantas, Cathay, ANA, KLM, United, Lufthansa, BA and many others - or Delta. Cos if they did the cabin crew would be fired...

I once landed in Singapore on PAL and as the aircraft was taxi-ing to the gate, stopping several hundred yards away for some reason, and with the seat belt signs still illuminated dozens of passengers with their baggage proceeded to crowd the aisles intent on somehow getting off.... not sure how... Guess what the cabin crew did? Nothing... not a thing... Nor did the captain even bother to explain the reason for the 10 minute delay or instruct passengers to take their seats. But the flight was over an hour late getting in so I guess the passengers had pretty much seen enough... This nonsense is not unique to PAL, but I've seen enough to have an insight into how different airlines rank safety. Of course it's Number 1?.. Nonsense.

As I said to the OP, PAL are OK, nothing special. On a good day I'd rate them average, on a bad day, as poor as it can get... They were banned from flying to Europe for several years, not sure why, but I'm happy they've resumed that service and hope they can expand further. They were a better airline 30 years ago. They went through a dreadful patch in the 90's and are genuinely trying hard to match their neighbours in Singapore, Hong Kong and Thailand but have a long way to go. Budget carriers such as Cebu Pacific and Air Asia have taken away a huge chunk of PAL's potential customer base short haul and the Gulf carriers are screwing them on long haul routes. Given the enormous growth in passenger numbers to and from the Philippines over the past 30 years, 12 million OFW's for a start, PAL should have a larger percentage of the MNL passenger and freight traffic. The reason they don't is that they're not very well run - and other airlines are.

Disagree. I have had some truly outstanding crews, many excellent and very now and then downright poor

They don't have to be anything other than competent. They are not there to perform a song-and-dance, do a variety performance or provide witty repartee. I couldn't even care less what they look or dress like. They are there to serve the food and drinks and to be on the ball in the unlikely event anything goes wrong.

#43.. Hey callippo, maybe they could just use robots... put 'em on a rail and just scoot up and down the aisle... fasten your seat belt, chicken or beef, tea, coffee, duty-free?, Yes we take all major credit cards... they could sling passengers out in an emergency.. I'm sure Ryanair will have looked at it in detail and decided the fuel penalty for the extra weight of the rail and would make it less cost effective... and also Ryanair cabin crew gotta be cheaper than robots.. gotta be...

They've replaced check-in with machines. They WANT to replace pilots with computers who don't have a bad day, or get drunk, or go on strike, or fly into each other or into mountains... Why not robots in the cabin?... wouldn't be much of a change on some airlines..

Having said that I'm pretty sure some of those Eastern European girls on Emirates are androids.. they all look pretty much the same and have a vocabulary of about 20 words in addition to those listed above.

Thread drift... Interestingly both Boeing and Airbus are looking at future designs with single pilot cockpits - and the only reason they still stick with human pilot is passengers just wouldn't fly in planes flown remotely or with autonomous systems - and they're probably right. If a computer can fly a plane (which they can), then so can a hacker.

they ARE pretty robotic and interchangeable. There was just no difference between the Cathay Pacific crew I had this year compared to the Air France/China Southern I had last year or the Etihad one the year before that. I fail to see exactly what they are supposed to make them seem 'outstanding'. I suppose they might come into their own if somebody has a heart attack or there's a shoe or underpants bomber on board or something, but so far apart from a single emergency landing that happened 30 years ago in New York when I was like 15 and can't remember very well, nothing like that has ever happened to me on any flight I've been on.

How 'friendly' the crew are comes very,very low on my list of priorities for choosing a flight or airline....otherwise I wouldn't fly very often on Ryanair or other budget airlines here in Europe,for example.

Still,everyone has their priorities.

Some people seem very worried about 'safety'.I take the view that all airlines are theoretically safe (or they wouldn't get permission to fly)and if something does goes wrong..that is fate.So that plays no part in the airline I choose at all.

#45 You're right there... in the shoe bomber incident were it not for the courage and quick wits of cabin crew and passengers, that American Airlines flight would have gone down mid Atlantic, with little chance of anyone knowing why... Given the extreme fears around terrorism at the time, there's every liklihood that AA would have gone bust within a month... BIG tick in the box for that cabin crew.

30 or 40 years ago cabin crew was a plumb job - pretty good money and benefits. But flying was expensive then, and airline employees were generally paid well - but there were a lot fewer planes... Now flying's cheap - and the customers want it cheaper. Today we can fly from Europe to SE Asia in Economy for less than the ticket price in 1980 - and if you shop around, as you do callippo - a LOT less... respect... Safety, reliability, frequency of flights etc., all have improved but the relentless drive on costs and the race to the bottom means that we don't have the best airlines - we have the airlines we deserve and the best airlines we're prepared to pay for.

Personally I like it that way. I travel a lot and I've better things to spend my wedge on than expensive airline tickets. I don't mind mediocre airlines with basic service as long as they're safe and reliable. I'd be prepared to pay more for MORE safe and MORE reliable and probably more for better paid staff... but not any more for food that you wouldn't consider eating at home or in a restaurant or movies that you've seen already or bars at the back. I would pay more for Airports that didn't treat people like cattle but I'm not really convinced they'd spend the money on passenger comfort - just more shopping malls with a few planes parked out the back.

safety on flights : I wish I could remember that flight 30 years ago better and how the cabin crew responded, but it was clearly a dangerous situation. We'd taken off from Logan and shortly afterwards the pilot announced that there was something wrong with the landing gear and we were going to have to fly around in circles for a few hours above the Atlantic before doing an emergency landing at JFK. Kind of exiting for a 15 year old kid I suppose, but some people in the cabin were really upset. When the landing happened we were all in the crash position of course and they were dozens of people sobbing in fear. Obviously we made it, but they looked after us much worse than they probably would have done today. We were kept just in a room at the airport for hours and hours with no food until a replacement flight was arranged. I think these days we would have been packed off to a hotel. For some people it was probably quite a traumatic experience.

Lao Aviation, which was what they were called before they renamed Lao Airlines was genuinely scary. Luckily it was all over in about 30 minutes and I wasn't dead.

once I was on a charter from Tel Aviv to London that had been taken over by a bunch of Orthodox going to some convention or other, it was totally hectic with zillions of kids running around in the the aisles playing tag. Ridiculous. I went to the back and said to the secular Israeli stewardess you shouldn't allow that it's dangerous three of those kids could try one of the doors for a joke, and none of the adults would do anything. They'd just laugh too. She just shrugged her shoulders in resignation and said there's nothing you can say to them.

Saw exactly the same thing on Emirates once - the Arab husbands and multiple wives in First and Business.. dozens of their sprogs dumped in Economy clutching their new I pads from MBK in Bangkok... Totally unsupervised - and total mayhem. If an adult did half of what these kids were up to on a plane the police would be waiting for them in Dubai...

I asked one of the cabin crew if this was common? "Pretty much, and there's little we can do about given the amount of money these people are spending..." I suggested picking out one of them and giving them a good stiff belt round the ear. There would be NO more disruption, they'd be quiet as mice and before landing in Dubai they'd all be running around helping the cabin crew collect the earphones 'n blankets... I think she agreed, but couldn't possibly say so...

This topic has been automatically locked due to inactivity. Email community@lonelyplanet.com if you would like to add to this topic and we'll unlock it for you.