Dtwrunner From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 29 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 9 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 15392 times:
I don't know about you but going transatlantic on a 757 is a little "iffy." Continental offers service to a few western European countries using their 752's. Anyone been on one such flight? Is the service as good as the widebody flights. What's different? What's the same? Do they offer anything different on these flights to make up for the lack of personal space? Just wondering.
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 9 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 15262 times:
I don't know about you but going transatlantic on a 757 is a little "iffy."
Here we go again. Sheesh.
What's "iffy" about it? It's within the aircrafts range to fly it safely; And guess what, the "personal space" isn't much different than on a widebody-the coach seats are the same, the B/First seats are relatively the same. It isn't as wide, but that doesn't have squat to do with personal space.
AV8AJET From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1333 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (10 years 9 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 15199 times:
I've taken the EWR - GLA -EWR flight, FC on the way over and coach back. The FC was very nice. In-seat IFE and a good selection of programming. FC meal was very impressive and the seat was quite comfortable. Now on the GLA - EWR in coach this is a different story. The seat pitch was awful, the food sparse and not the best, also the annoying single aisle caused horrible problems with flight attendants serving and everyone going to the bathroom!!! You could tell the FA's were not thrilled about working this flight! Also the lack of available restrooms caused a huge line! The IFE in coach had the drop down LCD screen which was hard to watch because of the "sea" of heads. These dropped down from the overhead panel where the reading lights are. The GPS moving map display was a nice touch. I would recommend FC but coach...look forward to a uncomfortable, annoying flight...sorry me 2 cents!
Dtwrunner From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 29 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 9 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 15172 times:
SOrry, I didnt mean to stir up anger. I just thought that it is not like the 777 which may have more space on board. It is smaller and I just figured that it was "iffy" because it is towards the end of the aircrafts range. Thats all. It is obviously safe becasue they wouldent use the aircraft if it wasent. I am not saying it would have problems hopping the pond or something crazy like that, just that there may be more of a secure sence aboard a 777. Thats all
Dtwrunner From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 29 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 9 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 15100 times:
see? AV8AJET had a great response. He has been on a flight so he gave his opinion on it. I think its pretty obvious that the 757 can make the trip...I didnt need to be told that. And I also know narrow bodies can do it. But the point I was getting at was the mental side. Do wide bodies make people feel safer? More engines? I AM NOT SAYING they are safer but some people would rather be on a 77 rather then a 75 for various "safety" reasons. (justified or not)
Setjet From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 1112 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (10 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14762 times:
I flew a couple of times in a B737 across the pond (in a BBJ), the experience is just thrilling. It feels a lot more intimate than in a B777 or even B747, the service is usually more personalised (with Privatair at least) and the flight is quiter (I guess less people create less noise).
Proudtoflyaa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (10 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14724 times:
I traveled Continental's transatlantic B757 service... EWR-SNN/DUB-EWR. Comparing it to other carriers, I wasn't overly pleased. In coach bulkhead row aisle, legroom was good enough. However, the flight attendants on the overnight flight left the cabin lights on the entire flight and spent much of it in the aisle. A total of four drink services, two meal services, and a couple of run throughs with the duty free is just too much for a 5 hour overnight flight.
FlyCMH From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 2277 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (10 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14703 times:
I took a Continental 757-200 flight across the pond in 2000 and found it to be quite nice. Personal space was just fine, and the entertainment provided (flip-down LCD screens w/ range of audio choices) was just fine. Add to that a terrific in-flight crew and pleasant meal service, and the fact that the 757 is one of my favorite aircraft, I'd definitely do it again without hesitation.
CALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3924 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (10 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14597 times:
I'm glad you experienced a good flt FlyCMH. ProudtoflyAA I apologize, I wouldnt want the lights on either. From the Ireland wrap-around flt I took, it seemed dark in the cabin which put me to sleep faster. The Ireland runs can be very quick, and should be sometimes quicker than EWR-SFO/LAX. How come no one complains about those. Atleast traveling to Eurpoe its night time and most people will be sleeping anyways. I look at it like this, either we fly 757's across the pond or we dont, and our international product will shrink by about 40%, so I will take it anyday!!
okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
AMM744 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2003, 211 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (10 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14594 times:
Maybe the majors should start considering MD-80's or even BAC 1-11's for Atlantic Crossing's. Just think of the cost savings - this of course is what counts the most.
As I've already stated in another post, We've not progressed at all in over 30 years. In 1958 or 9 the 707 made it's first crossing over the Atlantic and now in 2003 !!! we still have people out there harping on about teeny twinjets crossing the pond.
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (10 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14388 times:
What they get, is the fact that you have no idea as to what you speak
The fact that "teeny twinjets" (as you so eloquently phrased it) can and do cross the Atlantic safely, efficiently, and regularly... speaks much for progress. That's not something that was feasible in the 1950s
Airplanepics From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2003, 2730 posts, RR: 41
Reply 22, posted (10 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14378 times:
I couldnt stand spending that long on a long pencil! I hated my flight on UA from ORD-TPA on the 757, and that was only 3 1/2 hours! I think there two long, and narrow, and cramped.......... But thats just my thoughts.
BDRules From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2000, 1501 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (10 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14378 times:
I am flying FI on the 752 next Friday LHR-KEF-BOS and rtn and I am not the slightest bit bothered. I sit down for 95% of the flight and the other 5%is wandering to the toilet and back. I did exactly the same on the A300 to SSH this summer and also the B747 to SYD. In the end you get a seat which is your own personal space and an isle usually no more than 2 seats away. Why does it matter to some people if there isnt another aisle on the other side of the a/c which you probably wont even walk down.