QF Business Class seats

[Travel Guru]

FirstClass,

I am what most people would refer to as a "wide person" and I sleep like a baby in the SkyBeds.

I find them wide enough and the seats are quite comfortable, MUCH better than ANY whY seat on any airline.

ejb

I'd definately agree with you there.

I have no problem with them as far as comfort, sure they're not as good as a full flat bed such as EY's offering, but it beats Y or Y+ any day of the week, and anyone who doesn't think so is kidding themselves.

TG

 

[notzac]

I can't get comfortable on a Skybed Mk I.. ends up giving me a backache if I put it in to bed mode. On the other hand, the new Skybed is great - I can very happily sleep on those.

 

[straitman]

NFI.

Maybe the wrong person has NFI :!:

 

[Sprucegoose]

Surely there can be no doubt that SkyBed is the least comfortable seat available in any class on any airline?
It must be some sort of antipodean joke; pay more to wish you you were back in the coach cabin?
At least in Y, you KNOW there's no possibilty of sleep.
J holds out a tantalising promise which is of course dashed as soon as you recline (sort of), scrunch your toes into the thoughtfully provided pocket to prevent joining your shoes under the seat in front and stare into the blackness while every thump of turbulence or footfall of inconsiderate attendant is amplified through the flimsy structure and into your kidneys.
Well done QF, it worked. I now refuse any longhaul flight except in F and even that's becoming a chore.
Btw you tried too hard with the A380 F seat design; cute but silly. I now make sure my flights are operated by an old 747. Better WCAX ratio; those kidneys, you know...

Quite obviously your comments portray you as disengenuous. You use the word antipodean so you are most probably a disafected pommie, suggest you fly BA if you find the QF product a kidney beater. Having done both I know where you will find me.

SPRUCE

 

[dede]

Maybe the wrong person has NFI :!:

I have NFI what NFI stands for!

 

[harvyk]

I was upgraded to a Y+ in J seat on SYD-SFO last week and did not get any sleep at all (may be something to do with the fact my friend took the aisle and left me with the middle seat). On the way back I had my Y+ seat with Y service and slept 7 hours solid. I seem to sleep better in Y+ than I do in J (and F is a tough comparison as the good champers is usually flowing and it's hard to sleep through good champers)

That doesn't mean a thing...

I flew SYD - SFO - SYD a month ago in a skybed each way. I got about 10 minutes sleep from SYD - SFO, and 7 hours sleep coming back SFO - SYD. Now before anyone says anything more (eg different seat, different aircraft), it was not only the exact same plane (not just type, but the exact same metal - The no smoking sign above 24A was green for some reason) but also the exact same seat (24D).

Flying overthere your bodyclock is set to AEST. Which means that you where most likely trying to go to sleep when your body clock is saying that it's only 4pm or 5pm. Coming back your body clock is telling you it's 11pm, 12am by the time you've had dinner. Thus it is a natural time to sleep.

 

[Gold Member]

Maybe the wrong person has NFI :!:

I made this comment in response to TravelGuru's 'how pathetic' comment to FirstClass's original post. I thought FirstClass made some sound observations (though not all of them IMHO) so for anyone to come back with 'how pathetic' was just unnecessary regardless whether they do/don't align with your personal findings. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and if someone is going to come out with that sort of rhetoric than there should be no quarms about my NFI in response to his comment.

 

[Travel Guru]

I made this comment in response to TravelGuru's 'how pathetic' comment to FirstClass's original post. I thought FirstClass made some sound observations (though not all of them IMHO) so for anyone to come back with 'how pathetic' was just unnecessary regardless whether they do/don't align with your personal findings. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and if someone is going to come out with that sort of rhetoric than there should be no quarms about my NFI in response to his comment.

Sorry, I'm still trying to understand how my suggesting that the OP's carryon was pathetic in any way suggests that I have No cough**** Idea??

I stand by my comments; I wouldn't have had a problem, nor would have even said anything had they not gone so over the top and trumpet blowing as to suggest that they're no better off in a skybed mk1 than they are in cattle..but instead they used the thread as a means to stroke their own ego and feed their own self importance, and IMO it was pathetic.

TG

 

[auriga]

I agree with you, TG!

 

[anat0l]

How much is the angle on the Skybed (I) seat? And if they are not 180 degrees then why are they still (perhaps infrequently) marketed as 'lie-flat'?

Moreover, if it is that horrible how the hell did it win some awards? Surely Marc Newson hasn't slept with everyone..... come on!

I haven't relaxed in a Skybed yet, but any angle closer to 180 degrees has got to be good. At best, it allows you a greater range of angles that you can adjust the seat to. Worse comes to worse, how about being a bit creative, e.g. requesting extra blankets or a pillow to "flatten" out the entire bed?

It seems that some people here think that the QF J Skybed is far worse than the QF Y seat. Even without the personal experience, I find that very hard to believe. I'll believe that the QF J Skybed is an abomination when someone turns out the mile-long rolodex for chiropractors that have invoiced QF.

 

[AviationNZ]

How much is the angle on the Skybed (I) seat? And if they are not 180 degrees then why are they still (perhaps infrequently) marketed as 'lie-flat'?

There are two terms for most business class seats, lie-flat and flat-bed. The former refers to the Skybed as it does lie flat, but at a slight angle (not sure exactly but I'd guess about 10 degrees). Flat-bed refers to a fully flat horizontal bed.

Personally, I find it a great product and can't wait to give the Skybed MkII a go. Although I do prefer the VS & NZ business beds for sleeping, it is still superior to any Y seat by a long, long way.

 

[equus]

The 180 degrees (or flat) is true - it refers to the angle between the seat and seat back. The "flat bed" part (which the Skybed Mk I is not) is a reference to whether or not the bed (when at 180 degrees flat) is parallel to the floor or not.

So, in theory, the infamous Rynair standing room proposal could also be classed as "flat" - just at right angles to the floor

 

[anat0l]

Perhaps QF could just install or readjust the upper part of the seat cushion on the existing Skybeds (I) such that it then becomes fully flat? Or perhaps a new lower part of the seat cushion (i.e. boost it up)?

Or it doesn't work like that?

 

[AviationNZ]

Perhaps QF could just install or readjust the upper part of the seat cushion on the existing Skybeds (I) such that it then becomes fully flat? Or perhaps a new lower part of the seat cushion (i.e. boost it up)?

Or it doesn't work like that?

I'm only guessing here, but I think that it is more to do with the actual mechanisms inside the Skybed body itself. The MkI and MkII shells look very similar, but the MkII beds are able to go fully flat which would leave me to believe they improved the design in mechanics. I'm sure someone else may have a more definite answer.

 

[estate]

The problem with Skybed MkI going flat is probably seat pitch, not mechanical design. MkI pitch is 60", MkII pitch is 80". My guess is there simply isn't room to make MkI a flat-bed (otherwise they would've made it flat to begin with).

 

[serfty]

BA have lie flat - I do find them rather narrow when compared to AkyBeds.

Skybed MkI is nearly flat at 8°.

For some this is enough to 'slide down forwards' while sleeping.

The angle allow your feet to 'tuck under' the seat in front.

 

[Gold Member]

Skybed MkI is nearly flat at 8°.

Mk1 is 172 degree angle, so 18° angle from horizontal. I assume that's what you meant Serfty?

 

[anat0l]

Mk1 is 172 degree angle, so 18° angle from horizontal. I assume that's what you meant Serfty?

I believe he did mean 8° indeed from the horizontal.

And of course not 18° - there are 180° in a straight line, not 190°.

 

[equus]

I believe 8° is correct for 744 but apparently it varies by aircraft type, and is 10° for 767 (not sure which variant, or whether they are still in service).

To achieve "lie-flat", you just need to convince the pilots to achieve 8° nose-up pitch for the flight (I am sure that will do wonders for fuel consumption......and excuse the probably incorrect terminology)

 

[estate]

The thing that gets me about the Skybed's not being flat is this - as serfty says they're at an 8 degree angle.
The cosine of 8 is 0.99027, which means a 2m long bed would take up just under 2cm more when horizontal than when sloped at 8 degrees.

And QF's biggest continuous J cabin is only four rows deep, so that means they needed 79.2mm more space in the Zone B J cabin to make the MkI Skybeds flat. 79mm!!

It's even easier upstairs (two blocks of three rows) and in the Zone C J cabin (two rows).

I know space is at a premium on planes, but surely the marketing value of flat-bed would make it worthwhile?