4xRuv From Israel, joined Dec 2003, 387 posts, RR: 2 Posted (9 years 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1960 times:
My MUM, took last night's LH690 fra - tlv, on A330, (she flew Y) and she said that they all had PTV's. After making sure she wasn't kidding, I can assure you that they did have them.
Could it be LH has finally decided to install them? Or was it just a special configuration?
Could it be the end of the historic LH PTVs thread?
Jcded From Switzerland, joined Jan 2004, 211 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1921 times:
LH got some second hand A330s from Swissair or Swiss, I think it was the latter, in any case it would still be the same arircraft regardless of the -air
Flying-Tiger From Germany, joined Aug 1999, 4111 posts, RR: 39 Reply 5, posted (9 years 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1727 times:
My info is that the new A330-300s all have PTVs installed. They will however stay switched off until the new economy product is launched later this year.
Ka From Switzerland, joined Apr 2000, 644 posts, RR: 11 Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1656 times:
Flying-Tiger:
I respect your always excellent information. Although I have to correct you here: I flew on LH A330-300 D-AIKA New York JFK-Frankfurt in Y-class in april and none of the seats had PTVs.
I have to admit though that all seats had a Video/Audio-switch in the armrest with already 4 channels for video and 31 for audio (more than mentioned in their inflight magazine!!). This is new from the normal installation where simply the first two channels are for the video program (en/ger) and the rest for music programs.
This looks to me definetely like the PTVs will be installed at a later stage. I predict this will happen after the installation of the new C-class and Flynet, maybe in coincident with or the preperation for the introduction of the A380 in 2007.
FraT From Germany, joined Sep 2003, 1101 posts, RR: 1 Reply 9, posted (9 years 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1588 times:
Ka is right. Only the leased A/C from Swissair, SABENA and Lauda Air have them in Economy. The new A333s and A346s have seats which can be easily reconfigured with PTV's but nobody knows when LH will do that.
So there will be a lot more threads about this topic during the next years.
Flying-Tiger From Germany, joined Aug 1999, 4111 posts, RR: 39 Reply 10, posted (9 years 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1541 times:
As said, my info is that the PTVs will come with the introduction of the new Economy class, which AFAIK is scheduled for late 2004, starting with the A333s. However, we all know that these decisions can be easily delayed or rescheduled, happens only all too often everywhere.
Sabena 690 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (9 years 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1465 times:
Hi Flying Tiger,
Do you have more info about the new Y-class? What will change etc etc?
About PVT's: I prefer a book/newspaper/some sleep above that awful PVT box under the seat in front of you. It's a matter of preference I guess, but it's sad that people don't seem to survive without a movie on a 10h flight.
What's the next step? Airline X is bad because they have no internet on board?
Bacxboys From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 42 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (9 years 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1396 times:
I agree that its all a matter of personal choice, however its a sign of the times!
Most passengers these days on a very long flight choose their airline for Value for money and what they have in the back of the seat!! ie PTV...
All said and done!! I managed to fly NRT/PER with QF on a 767 and survived with that centre screen!!
I am sure LH will change its policy, BA had to and QF.
Also a major Headache for any carrier with PTV is the failure of equipment.
At CX without fail we have at least 1 or 2 screens out in Y cls.
This means unless we can fix the problem we cannot sell the seat or we have to give the U/S seat TO id staff!!
WearyBizTrvlr From Netherlands, joined May 2004, 58 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (9 years 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1256 times:
Sabena690,
About PVT's: I prefer a book/newspaper/some sleep above that awful PVT box under the seat in front of you. It's a matter of preference I guess, but it's sad that people don't seem to survive without a movie on a 10h flight.
Well, sure you can survive without a PTV on a 10-hour flight. You can also survive a 10hr flight with 28 inch seat pitch. But that's not the point... why not make the flight more comfortable by offering more options? And differentiate yourself from the competition? On my westbound Atlantic crossings, I often use the PTV's. It's good to have as an extra option for entertainment, because I don't necessarily want to read or sleep the entire flight. And it is also a differentiator. Given the choice, I'll fly preferentially on the airline with more entertainment options. Of course, if it means you have to sacrifice leg room for a PTV, then the trade-off becomes different.
What's the next step? Airline X is bad because they have no internet on board?
Absolutely, yes! That will be the next differentiator. I will certainly choose the airline that does have internet over one that does not offer it (ceteris paribus). In fact, I'd even be willing to pay a premium for certain in-flight features like internet.
Qm001 From Portugal, joined Mar 2004, 266 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (9 years 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1243 times:
Dear All,
I love Lufties! I wish they would wake up and smell the coffee that whether they like it or not PTV's are part of the furture of air travel.
I remeber when LH used to be always the carrier leading technological leap. It seems now as though they have let all the Asian Majors take over. Its a real pity!
Kind regards,
QM001 (167 Air Malawi)
I wish there was still a flying boat service on the African Lakes!
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 21 Reply 18, posted (9 years 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1101 times:
Personally, I'd rather have more legroom than a flickering screen just inches from my face...
What most people probably don't realise is that PTVs make your seat bulkier which means that the effective legroom gets less (as the legroom published is including the size of the seat).
PTVs also make the aircraft heavier and require more electrical power, both of which mean higher fuel burn and therefore higher seat/mile cost, thus increasing the minimum ticket price the airline must charge to remain profitable.
WearyBizTrvlr From Netherlands, joined May 2004, 58 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (9 years 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1018 times:
That's my point: ok for me if you want to pay more for a PVT, but does everybody want to pay more for a PVT?
I guess that depends on the pricing structure of the airlines. I don't know enough about fares to make a generalized statement on this, but for instance on the AMS-SIN route the prices of KL and SQ are not very different, while SQ offers superior entertainment options. Moreover, the prices on the AMS-JFK flights have not gone up since KL started flying 777's with PTV's AFAIK. Admittedly, this is anectodal, but it would indicate that having PTV's does not necessarily increase the price.
LH manages to fill their planes without having PVT's. Installing PVT's would only increase the fixed costs of their flight operations.
They manage to fill their planes now without having PTV's, but as more of their competitors install them, there will come a point where it'll become a competitive disadvantage not to have them. Suppose that at some point AF, BA and KL offer PTV's and LH does not on Atlantic routes while prices are similar; with some targeted marketing, I can imagine LH would start losing market share. The hassle of a transfer in CDG, LHR or AMS would put an upper bound on the LH defectors' numbers, but I imagine there are plenty of leisure travelers who would not mind.
At this point the savings in fixed costs would be outweighed by the lower loads. (As an aside, it seems to me the fixed cost increase would be limited, but it's rather the one-off capital cost that makes the biggest dent in finances. Does anybody have firm data on this?)
WearyBizTrvlr From Netherlands, joined May 2004, 58 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (9 years 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1008 times:
Jwenting: I certainly agree I'd rather have more legroom than a PTV! I hadn't thought of the fuel burn implications of the PTV systems... any idea how much more fuel is used?
Startknob From Germany, joined May 2004, 156 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (9 years 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 809 times:
Good question: "How much fuel does an PTV cost?"
OK, let's do some VERY simplified math in order to get a very, very roughed idea how many fuel is spent for inflight entertainment.
Let's assume (please don't flame - just guesses, no hard numbers!) we have
- a widebody a/c with e.g. 350 seats.
- a PTV control box per seat and a video screen, control pad and complete cabling with 2kg per seat.
- a central PTV control rack server let's assume some 15 kg.
- around 20 screens less in the overhead bins as you can find them in a/c without PTV, lets assume -30 kg altogether.
- average flight duration 5 hours for our a/c with 1/2 hour of descent and landing
- average three such flights per day.
OK: Net weight of PTV is then: (350x2)+15-30 = 685kg. Let's say around 700kg total for simplification.
Some more assumptions for further simplification:
- say we skip the fuel needed for the electricity powering the PTV system
- say the average climb rate of our a/c during starts and climb would be 20m/s (lifting in y-direction).
- say the normal cruising speed the PTV has to be accelerated from the start would be 850 km/h (acceleration in x-direction).
- say our avg. climb duration to the assigned FL would be eight minutes from takeoff (8min. = 480sec. with 20m/s makes 9600m height or somewhere around FL25..FL28)
- say less ECS-heating of the cabin due to heat of the PTV's is also not mentioned.
To lift our 700kg PTV system from the surface up to the 9600m you would need around 137 kW additional thrust in each climb phase for our PTV only four our eight minutes of climb per start.
To accelerate our PTV and keep it flying with 850 km/h (around 236 m/sec) horizontally you would need a thrust of around 82,6 kW sustained for start, climb and cruise phases of the flight.
Given our flight schedule with three such flights a day 5 hours each with 8 min. climb each we would get to accommodate our PTV:
24 minutes of 220 kW additional power for starts/climb.
786 minutes of 82,6 kW additional power for the flights.
Every day.
For a lifespan of let's say ten years for the PTV with 340 days/year operation of the a/c this sums up to
81600 minutes or more than two days (!) of 220 kW additional power for starts/climb.
2672400 minutes or more than sixty months (!) of 82,6 kW additional power for the flights.
I would say that's a LOT of fuel! To get an idea: http://www.tribnet.com/business/story/4979363p-4907348c.html
citing: "Alaska Airlines considered reducing the number of magazines it routinely carries on short-range flights, but it hasn't done so yet. Eliminating five magazines from each of the company's 108 aircraft would save about $10,000 a year in fuel expense, the company estimates."
Let's assume one magazine has a weight of 200 grams. Then five of them would be 1kg. And we're talking about estimated 700kg fleet-wide.
What's $10000 * 700?
A lot of money.
Every year.
And increasing with Jet A-1 fuel prices.
Perhaps "no frills" or "no-IFE's" or "no-PTVs" airlines are not too nice for a certain segment of passengers.
But not having them is VERY nice to the operating cost (fuel) of the fleet.
Best Regards,
Kojak
P.S.: Perhaps some geek out there is able to translate the numbers found to gallons or kg/h fuel burn.
When playing cat and mice it's imperative to know, who's the cat.
KA501 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 246 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (9 years 2 days ago) and read 729 times:
Was on a LH A340-600 from KIX 2 weeks ago and the inflight entertainment was dreadful.
To start with the safety video wouldn't work much to the embarecment of the crew who had to do a live display.
Some guy with a pony tail was running frantically up and down the plane trying to get the system to work (I believe they have technicians from Rockwell on each flight because the system is so bad)
1 hour into the flight they announced the entertainment system would be turned off while they rebooted the system. To be fair this worked!
Not bad on D-AIHI 2 weeks out of Toulouse!
Sponsor Message: 
From Israel, joined Dec 2003, 387 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8754 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Jan 2004, 211 posts, 
From Venezuela, joined Oct 2003, 219 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Aug 1999, 4111 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2002, 548 posts, 
From Thailand, joined Apr 2001, 985 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Netherlands, joined May 2004, 58 posts, 
From Portugal, joined Mar 2004, 266 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Feb 2004, 57 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
