Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
NZ Changes Legroom On B777-300ER  
User currently offlineLondonCity From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2008, 1483 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 15848 times:

The change affects only the premium economy cabin on NZ's new B777-300ERs which entered service recently on the AKL-LHR-LHR route.

According to this report it seems that passenger complaints about the lack of legroom in the premium economy cabin has prompted NZ to remove an entire row of seats to provide an extra 6 inches of legroom.

Seems to be a climbdown by the kiwi airline. And losing six seats will cost it a fair amount of revenue on this long route.

The reconfiguration is set to take place during August.

http://www.ausbt.com.au/air-new-zeal...room-in-premium-economy-spaceseats

50 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineaerorobnz From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 7184 posts, RR: 13
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 15517 times:

Just an observation but an increase like that changes more than just seat pitch I'm sure, it might need re-certification and all that.

User currently offlineBD338 From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 15152 times:

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 1):
Just an observation but an increase like that changes more than just seat pitch I'm sure, it might need re-certification and all that.

Why would it require re-certification? Carriers add and remove seats all the time, as long as it doesn't add seats over the maximum number of passengers or total weight allowed by the type certificate then no problem I can see. Isn't certification a manufacturer/regulator item rather than each carrier?

The Air NZ premium economy product is beginning to have the concept of some of the early airline Business Class products. If they've moved seats out I wonder if they'll be increasing the price to compensate and moving further towards Business Class prices?


User currently offlineaerorobnz From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 7184 posts, RR: 13
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 14926 times:

Quoting BD338 (Reply 2):
Why would it require re-certification?

5-6" difference is a fairly large difference when it comes to safety features like airbags in the eyes of FAA approval... Like I say, I have no idea whether or not it will impact, just playing devil's advocate...


User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7135 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 14804 times:

I would be more inclined to wonder why those in charge of customer service had no clue there would be complaints, obviously they had a/c in the fleet already operating long haul flights to LHR, is it a mindset that people would just take whats given with no complaints?
Another point of note is that this is one of the reasons why competitors get a foothold in the market, folks may actually try another airline if the cabin is more comfortable. Usually it make no difference on short haul filghts, but long haul is a whole different story.

The cost of removing 6 seats is more than just removal, you now have to adjust all the seats in the cabin to provide the extra space, definately some money lost, could be called a fiasco.


User currently offlineknoxibus From France, joined Aug 2007, 259 posts, RR: 23
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 14443 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BD338 (Reply 2):
Why would it require re-certification?

Most changes through engineering orders require a stamp from your local airworthiness authorities. This is why Airlines love to go through the OEMs to pay for OEMs Service Bulletin so that it is already stamped by EASA/FAA or else.

In that sense, it is far easier to go back to your authorities and say "look, the OEM has obtained the stamp for their authorities, so it is piece of cake for you guys to sign on it".

Ok, that's a simplified way of putting, but in any case, this is what happens (when the SBs are not too expensive).

But such a reconfig impacts Passenger Service Units for example (reading light/oxygen mask, exit/no smoking/fasten seat belt signs, loudspeaker for PA), changes the weight and balance of your aircraft, changes part numbers on-board your aircraft (the IFE database needs to be changed), re-locates also harnesses and such.

And you would want no verifiation/stamp/re-certification for all this work from the authorities?



No matter what anybody tells you, words and ideas can change the world.
User currently offlineLondonCity From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2008, 1483 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 14371 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 4):
I would be more inclined to wonder why those in charge of customer service had no clue there would be complaints,

Yes, especially as NZ's B777-300ERs only flew long-haul for the first time as recently as April 1. I've never known any international airline modify its seating configuration so soon after a new layout/seat design was installed.


User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6184 posts, RR: 31
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 14136 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LondonCity (Thread starter):
Seems to be a climbdown by the kiwi airline. And losing six seats will cost it a fair amount of revenue on this long route.

Why a climbdown? On the contrary, it shows they listened. Not a single forum on civil aviation, or travel magazine has spoken positively about this cabin, precisely because of the seat pitch. This shows they listened. Otto is proud I´m sure.

I bet soon they will announce they will discard their ridiculuous Y 10 abreast seating which I am sure is costing them lots of former loyal customers.



MGGS
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9605 posts, RR: 52
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 13875 times:

I'm not that surprised that they are increasing pitch. It was a partially angled seat so that the pitch felt better than it was, but the seats were installed with 36'' pitch, which is pretty low for premium economy, especially considering that regular economy on the 747s is 34'' pitch. Seat pitch in regular economy on the 77Ws is 33''


If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2012 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 13023 times:

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 8):
I'm not that surprised that they are increasing pitch. It was a partially angled seat so that the pitch felt better than it was, but the seats were installed with 36'' pitch, which is pretty low for premium economy, especially considering that regular economy on the 747s is 34'' pitch. Seat pitch in regular economy on the 77Ws is 33''

Isn't the problem caused by the design being like business class seating in having no space for your feet under the seat in front of you. 36" in Y with foot space under the seat in front is fine, 36" with a wall isn't!

Quoting AR385 (Reply 7):
I bet soon they will announce they will discard their ridiculuous Y 10 abreast seating which I am sure is costing them lots of former loyal customers.

Has there been much feedback about this, bearing in mind the length of most NZ longhaul flights?



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlinedarenw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 12931 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 9):
Quoting AR385 (Reply 7):
I bet soon they will announce they will discard their ridiculuous Y 10 abreast seating which I am sure is costing them lots of former loyal customers.

Has there been much feedback about this, bearing in mind the length of most NZ longhaul flights?

From whats been said on the NZ forum there haven't been many complaints from passengers about the 10 abreast.


User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5403 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 12928 times:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 7):
ridiculuous Y 10 abreast seating which I am sure is costing them lots of former loyal customers.

...which is almost identical to the seating which has been in their 744s for years without issue.

People are so theatrical about 10Y in a 777. It's really not a big deal, although the aisles are a bit narrow.


User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21511 posts, RR: 60
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 12500 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 11):
...which is almost identical to the seating which has been in their 744s for years without issue.

.7" narrower, 1-2" less legroom, narrower armrests than the 747. Hardly identical.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5403 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11986 times:

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 12):
.7" narrower, 1-2" less legroom, narrower armrests than the 747. Hardly identical.

Where are you getting .7"?

Pretty much all 744 seats (including NZ's) are 17.2" wide. NZ is also using 17.2" seats on the 77W. No one that I know of is using seats narrower than 17.0" on a 777. The armrests may be a bit narrower, but it's not an enormous difference.

The legroom has nothing to do with whether the seating is 9Y or 10Y.


User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6184 posts, RR: 31
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11505 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 11):
People are so theatrical about 10Y in a 777. It's really not a big deal, although the aisles are a bit narrow.
Quoting seabosdca (Reply 13):
The armrests may be a bit narrower, but it's not an enormous difference.
Quoting seabosdca (Reply 11):
...which is almost identical to the seating which has been in their 744s for years without issue.

Let me recap:

1. "The aisles are a bit narrow"
2. "The armrests may be a bit narrower"

And you say people are being theatrical? A narrow armrest on a 12.5 hr. flight ranks up there as some of the most uncomfortable things in Y, right next to seat pitch.

A narrow aisle gives a very uncomfortable sensation. During boarding with your carry on, when walking to and from the toilette and when you need to move during food service. Granted, people shouldn´t do that but they do.

And your assertion that 10 abreast has been the same on the 744s without issue, while true, is irrelevant, as the 747 is a wider plane. Its interior cabin width is 6.1 mts. The 777´s is 5.86 meters. That´s a difference of 15 cms. which is not irrelevant on the stage lengths NZ is using them.

NZ 777´s Y cabin must be one of the most uncomfortable ones out there. Up there with AF´s and EK´s.



MGGS
User currently offlineAADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2088 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11480 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 11):
Quoting AR385 (Reply 7):
ridiculuous Y 10 abreast seating which I am sure is costing them lots of former loyal customers.

...which is almost identical to the seating which has been in their 744s for years without issue.

People are so theatrical about 10Y in a 777. It's really not a big deal, although the aisles are a bit narrow.

Of course, both the 747 and 777 were originally configured at 9 abreast. UA and other launch customers of the 777 asked for more width so they could have a distinctly roomy Y cabin. Some carriers however decided to add seats. The same thing happened with the 787. It was supposed to be 8 abreast in response passenger requests for individual armrests and have an edge over the A330 but even long before launch, most carriers decided to go to 9 abreast. Pitch has steadily been closing in for years and now width is going.


User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21511 posts, RR: 60
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 11346 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 13):
Where are you getting .7"?

Pretty much all 744 seats (including NZ's) are 17.2" wide. NZ is also using 17.2" seats on the 77W. No one that I know of is using seats narrower than 17.0" on a 777. The armrests may be a bit narrower, but it's not an enormous difference.

The legroom has nothing to do with whether the seating is 9Y or 10Y.

You are pretty much wrong.

747 seats vary quite a bit in width, from 17" at BA to 17.8" at NZ (the same as the 77E seats at NZ). The 77W seats are 17.1". Combined with the narrower armrests, that's close to 2" of decreased shoulder room. That is NOTICEABLE difference for most grown men. It's more cramped than a 737, and you get three men in a row on a 737 and it's not comfortable. For 3 hours, okay. For 13 hours, no thanks...



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineTGV From France, joined Dec 2004, 874 posts, RR: 20
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10630 times:

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 16):
You are pretty much wrong.

747 seats vary quite a bit in width, from 17" at BA to 17.8" at NZ (the same as the 77E seats at NZ). The 77W seats are 17.1". Combined with the narrower armrests, that's close to 2" of decreased shoulder room. That is NOTICEABLE difference for most grown men. It's more cramped than a 737, and you get three men in a row on a 737 and it's not comfortable. For 3 hours, okay. For 13 hours, no thanks...

I totally agree with the above mentioned comments: the only case where a 10 abreast 777 is more or less bearable is if you have free seats next to you.

Otherwise you are in permanent elbow contact with your neighbours. And on 13 hour long flights you'd better choose another airline.
  



Avoid 777 with 3-4-3 config in Y ! They are real sardine cans. (AF/KL for example)
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2012 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10313 times:

A very good reason for searching out an A380 flight, 10Y with comfortable seat width (even on operators like EK and AF who operate 10Y 777s)

Until the first 11Y A380 emerges...



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25154 posts, RR: 22
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10184 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 11):
Quoting AR385 (Reply 7):
ridiculuous Y 10 abreast seating which I am sure is costing them lots of former loyal customers.

...which is almost identical to the seating which has been in their 744s for years without issue.

People are so theatrical about 10Y in a 777. It's really not a big deal, although the aisles are a bit narrow.

It is a big deal. Even small differences are very noticeable when even 9-abreast on 777 is not much better than 10-abreast on a 747. It's often the perception of space created by the narrower aisles etc. than the actual dimensions. But the narrow armrests and less space between the seat cushions/backs themselves also gives a much greater sensation of crowding on a full flight. It's fine if you have an empty seat next to you but that can rarely be counted on these days.


User currently offlineYULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2178 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 9863 times:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 7):
I bet soon they will announce they will discard their ridiculous Y 10 abreast seating which I am sure is costing them lots of former loyal customers.

I'll believe it when I see it. As far as I know, it has not hurt EK nor AF yet, and one loyal customer in New Z can always try to switch NZ for another big player there, namely EK.
Yes, it's cramped, but looks like people don't care. The cheaper the better for the average flier, and the most loyal customers will have the opportunity to enjoy an Y+ cabin anyway.



When I doubt... go running!
User currently offlineGCT64 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 1389 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 9718 times:

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 20):
Quoting AR385 (Reply 7):
I bet soon they will announce they will discard their ridiculous Y 10 abreast seating which I am sure is costing them lots of former loyal customers.

I'll believe it when I see it.

Well it has cost them loyal customers at my company. Prior to the 77W introduction, we were very regular AirNZ Y class customers on LHR-LAX and vice versa - it was our preferred option. We are now using other options.



Flown in: A30B,A306,A310,A319,A320,A321,A332,A333,A343,A346,BA11,BU31,B190, B461,B462,B463,(..50 types..),VC10,WESX
User currently offlineZKSUJ From New Zealand, joined May 2004, 7092 posts, RR: 12
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 9277 times:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 7):
I bet soon they will announce they will discard their ridiculuous Y 10 abreast seating which I am sure is costing them lots of former loyal customers.

If this is the case, then the 748I or 388 will be on the cards. Id imagine a 6 seat loss in Y+ and another 40 ish in Y if removing a row would now go down well economically (Especially since it seems like they are trying to cram 744 capacity onto a smaller 77W).

I don't think they will remove a row in Y, but you never know I guess


User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17439 posts, RR: 46
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 9036 times:

I didn't think NZ's new Y+ made any sense before this change, and now it makes even less sense--how do you reasonably price a Y+ product that occupies almost 50% more space?

Quoting AR385 (Reply 7):
I bet soon they will announce they will discard their ridiculuous Y 10 abreast seating which I am sure is costing them lots of former loyal customers.

They will do that as soon as passengers start paying more for airfare, which will occur shortly after hell freezes over.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlinedarenw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 7382 times:

http://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/press...tigious-conde-nast-traveller-award

They must be doing something right


25 PacificClipper : Hardly theatrics. 9 across offers an 18" wide seat while 10 across offers a 17" wide seat (yes, that is the standard Y seat width on all Boeing narro
26 Airvan00 : Well Hell must have freezed over in this part of the world. SYD-LAX is available with UA for about $200 cheaper than QF. I travel to Europe every yea
27 Pellegrine : IMO good change. Now Y+ is differentiated better from Y, and therefore (theoretically) they will be in a better position charging higher fares for it.
28 skyhigh : Have you actually flown NZ 10 across Y class? I take it that you must have to make such a bold statement! Once NZ has fixed the leg room issue in Y+
29 nzrich : Hey at least it shows NZ does listen to its passengers . This has to be a good thing that a airline realises it has made a mistake and rectifies it q
30 AR385 : No I haven´t. I don´t fly Y. And if I ever have to, I´ll be certain not to do it on an NZ 777 10 abreat Y class. Same for AF, and for EK. But I ha
31 EDICHC : Or until enough customers have switched to other carriers.
32 skyhigh : Actually, carrying people on the Kangaroo route from Australia to Europe, as well as NZ to Europe is a big money earner for EK. Their multiple flight
33 NZdsgnr : well from the NZ Aviation Thread:
34 Kaiarahi : 50% higher price - which it is.
35 Post contains images par13del : The above comment is in direct contradiction to the one below. Unless I am understanding the comments incorrectly, you seem to be saying that the pax
36 aerokiwi : Perhaps, but it also makes you wonder what the development team were doing all that time in Seattle (check Youtube for the self-congratulatory drivel
37 Zkpilot : Or they could come up with a Y-. That is keep the last zone in current config of 10Y across, in the forward Y zone revert back to 9Y across and charg
38 ikramerica : Heck, SQ has 19" seats on the 77Ws! Same as the A380. A380 just has wider aisles, and I believe a double armrest in the group of 4 seats on the main
39 AR385 : Sorry, but I do not see the contradiction. The entire comment is above. It was a comment in direct reference to thtis comment: The way I interpreted
40 Post contains images joelyboy911 : I have flown LAX-AKL on this very aircraft in Y class seats, three days ago, and can assure you it was not torture. It wasn't even "uncomfortable". Y
41 kiwimex : Or charge passengers a fixed fee per-seat, then $x by their combined passenger+baggage weight. Then stick the skinny people down the back in the 10Y
42 B747-4U3 : With all due respect, I dont think you can 'confidently' say that their product will be torture if you have not yourself tried it. I would have said
43 Viscount724 : Putting 10 people in the same space as 9 can't help but be less spacious. Even 9-abreast on a 777 is unpleasant enough for me, but at least it's in a
44 Zkpilot : 9 wide 777s in most airlines have wider seats and aisles than 744s. As for A330/340s they tend to have 744 sized or slightly larger but still smaller
45 Viscount724 : With flights on most routes so full these days, the probability of winding up in a middle Y seat is also important. From best to worst: 767 (2-3-2) -
46 MaverickM11 : 50% more for cramped seating? Doesn't make any sense to me. I'd bet it's actually the reverse--most of their money is made on connecting destinations
47 Post contains links Airvan00 : a very useful tool is at http://www.seatguru.com/charts/longhaul_economy.php the columns can be sorted which makes a useful comparison. Friends of min
48 EDICHC : You underestimate the competition out of NZ. Take one of the most important routes AKL-LHR you can go via LAX or HKG with NZ, also via HKG with CX, v
49 NZ1 : Hi Everyone, A number of posts have had to be removed due to off topic nature this thread had started to take. Please stick to the subject of the thre
50 Kaiarahi : Well ... that's the point of this thread. Apparently pax reaction has caused a quick rethink.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Longest Flight Nonstop On B777-300ER? posted Thu Mar 15 2007 11:41:00 by AirCanada014
When Will AC B777-300ER Be On Production Line? posted Sun Oct 8 2006 23:12:25 by AirCanada014
Emirates B777-300ER To BHX On 7 May posted Fri May 6 2005 22:55:00 by Emirates777
Engine Shutdown On AF B777-300ER Delivery Flight. posted Sat Jun 5 2004 09:28:55 by Ejazz
The New United & B777-300ER posted Sat Dec 11 2010 18:45:05 by CONTACTDEPARTUR
Air China To Buy 4 X B777-300ER posted Fri Sep 10 2010 07:49:51 by Thorben
British Airways And The B777-300ER posted Wed Aug 4 2010 06:33:13 by BAfan
DL, AA, CO, NZ Debut Seats On CBS posted Tue Jul 27 2010 15:12:47 by burnsie28
Emirates B777-300ER To Newcastle posted Mon Apr 26 2010 11:32:00 by gkirk
AA Cruches Nose On A B-767-300ER At AFW posted Mon Jul 20 2009 18:47:56 by KC135TopBoom