Alan Joyce confirms 9 across Y for QF 787

[codash1099]

Seat pitch doesn't worry me as much as the tray table impinging on my (somewhat over large) stomach. A curve in that would improve my comfort.

 

[medhead]

Unless of course you have a sufficiently educated market that will pay a premium for 8 abreast, on 25 rows, that would be I guess somewhere in the order of $125 a seat , or $250 on a return basis - perhaps slightly less to account for carrying ~2 tonnes less SLF and less catering. Difficult to recoup that amount in a very competitive environment.

What's the return on 2 tonnes of inanimate freight.

 

[juddles]

What's the return on 2 tonnes of inanimate freight.

Obviously there are variables but think of somewhere around $10.000

 

[dfcatch]

Well, I guess the 9-abreast configuration was inevitable. But still very disappointing, considering the ultra long-haul routes QF plan to operate these 787s on. Will be a very uncomfortable journey in Y, and QF will lose much of its competitive edge as a result.

I've flown on the JL 787 in a 2-4-2 configuration, as well as the JQ 3-3-3 version in Y. The difference is chalk & cheese - the JL flight was a very pleasant experience, while a JQ overnight flight in that configuration was simply awful.

And yet I've done 7 TPAC sectors in the last 6 months on the UA 787 in Y (3-3-3) and found it substantially more comfortable than both the 777 and even a QF 747 in Y.
(let's not talk about the soft service)

JQ was your issue - not the 3-3-3.

 

[downtheback]

And yet I've done 7 TPAC sectors in the last 6 months on the UA 787 in Y (3-3-3) and found it substantially more comfortable than both the 777 and even a QF 747 in Y.
(let's not talk about the soft service)

JQ was your issue - not the 3-3-3.

I've done Qatar B787 and Emirates B777 both in economy overnight and slept soundly with no aid except some soothing music. Absolutely nothing wrong with either of these cabin setups. Sometimes I wonder if people complain for the sake of it

 

[TomVexille]

I've done Qatar B787 and Emirates B777 both in economy overnight and slept soundly with no aid except some soothing music. Absolutely nothing wrong with either of these cabin setups. Sometimes I wonder if people complain for the sake of it

And for arguments sake, I believe dfcatch was talking about UA's 777's which are 9 abreast (excluding some Hawaiian routes)

 

[mannej]

And for arguments sake, I believe dfcatch was talking about UA's 777's which are 9 abreast (excluding some Hawaiian routes)

No, I believe he is referring to the 787's.

 

[TomVexille]

No, I believe he is referring to the 787's.

And the fact that he's been on a UA 777 as well

 

[Pleb Status]

If you always travel with your partner (and particularly if they sit in the middle seat), seat width will generally be less of an issue for you.

If you are a solo traveller, seat width becomes far more of an issue, especially as you have no control over who will be sitting next to you.

It is always a lot better flight when you get a shadow, no matter how tight the seat pitch is (assuming no 'recliners').

 

[Albion]

Personally I would have liked Qantas to look at 2-5-2 as it would be better for couples and singles plus only one passenger would have to climb over 2 pax each row.

 

[dajop]

And yet I've done 7 TPAC sectors in the last 6 months on the UA 787 in Y (3-3-3) and found it substantially more comfortable than both the 777 and even a QF 747 in Y.

Was that in regular or Economy Plus seating ? (noticed you are 1K)

Emirates B777 both in economy overnight and slept soundly with no aid except some soothing music. Absolutely nothing wrong with either of these cabin setups. Sometimes I wonder if people complain for the sake of it

EK 777 is fine .... unless you are connecting from an EK A380, then you notice the difference, or fly a lot of time on an airline with 3-3-3 on their 777's and then get onto an EK 3-4-3 777 .... What I'm saying without comparison it is fine, but when you have wider seats to compare it to then you notice. Less of an issue I expect if you have a slight frame. Even for people who are quite large, it depends on breadth not depth ... you could conceivably be quite fat and comfortable in the seats if you have a narrow frame.

Of course we all should not care, and support the race to the bottom ......

 

[Mr_Orange]

Was that in regular or Economy Plus seating ? (noticed you are 1K)



EK 777 is fine .... unless you are connecting from an EK A380, then you notice the difference, or fly a lot of time on an airline with 3-3-3 on their 777's and then get onto an EK 3-4-3 777 .... What I'm saying without comparison it is fine, but when you have wider seats to compare it to then you notice. Less of an issue I expect if you have a slight frame. Even for people who are quite large, it depends on breadth not depth ... you could conceivably be quite fat and comfortable in the seats if you have a narrow frame.

Of course we all should not care, and support the race to the bottom ......

The size of an economy seat with 10 abreast on a 777 is comparable to a domestic 737. That is fine for an hour or two, but it is far from fine for 14 hours. I didn't enjoy it for the relatively short flight CHC-SYD, and I had an aisle seat!

 

[cambriamarsh]

Personally I would have liked Qantas to look at 2-5-2 as it would be better for couples and singles plus only one passenger would have to climb over 2 pax each row.

FWIW I like this idea too. I've travelled on a Continental DC-10 from NYC to LGW many years ago and while I didn't like the middle seat I ended up in this layout has less middle seats. Can anyone comment in its pluses and minuses?

 

[Mattg]

FWIW I like this idea too. I've travelled on a Continental DC-10 from NYC to LGW many years ago and while I didn't like the middle seat I ended up in this layout has less middle seats. Can anyone comment in its pluses and minuses?

MH used this configuration on their Boeing 777s. I can see that it has its benefits, e.g. if you're a couple. But I think the main problem is that no-one would want to sit in the middle seat of the block of 5!

 

[TomVexille]

FWIW I like this idea too. I've travelled on a Continental DC-10 from NYC to LGW many years ago and while I didn't like the middle seat I ended up in this layout has less middle seats. Can anyone comment in its pluses and minuses?

MH used this configuration on their Boeing 777s. I can see that it has its benefits, e.g. if you're a couple. But I think the main problem is that no-one would want to sit in the middle seat of the block of 5!

Where it really works is when there's a family of 5

 

[medhead]

. But I think the main problem is that no-one would want to sit in the middle seat of the block of 5!

Still it gives one more option over the window seat in a block of 3.

 

[Albion]

MH used this configuration on their Boeing 777s. I can see that it has its benefits, e.g. if you're a couple. But I think the main problem is that no-one would want to sit in the middle seat of the block of 5!

Sell the middle of 5 seat as the cheapest seat.

 

[njba]

Sell the middle of 5 seat as the cheapest seat.

You'll never get a job with an airline with that attitude.

Add a $150 surcharge for selecting the seats around the middle seat.

Now that's an enhancement.

 

[JohnK]

FWIW I like this idea too. I've travelled on a Continental DC-10 from NYC to LGW many years ago and while I didn't like the middle seat I ended up in this layout has less middle seats. Can anyone comment in its pluses and minuses?

On 3-3-3 configuration there are 2 rows of passengers who are 2 seats away from an aisle and 3 rows of passengers who are only 1 seat away from aisle.

On a 2-5-2 configuration there is only 1 row of passengers who are 2 seats away from aisle and 4 rows of passengers who are only 1 seat away from aisle.

Personally I could just about tolerate a window seat in a 3-3-3 configuration if no choice in seating. On the other hand I could not tolerate being stuck in middle of 5 seats with 2 people either side. Too claustrophobic.

 

[levelnine]

On 3-3-3 configuration there are 2 rows of passengers who are 2 seats away from an aisle and 3 rows of passengers who are only 1 seat away from aisle.

On a 2-5-2 configuration there is only 1 row of passengers who are 2 seats away from aisle and 4 rows of passengers who are only 1 seat away from aisle.

Personally I could just about tolerate a window seat in a 3-3-3 configuration if no choice in seating. On the other hand I could not tolerate being stuck in middle of 5 seats with 2 people either side. Too claustrophobic.

Also in a 3-3-3 configuration the people who are 2 seats away from the aisle have a window/wall to lean up against, which isn't the case with the middle seat in a 2-5-2.

2-5-2 is better for couples; 3-3-3 is better for single travellers.