Airsicknessbag From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, RR: 34
Reply 2, posted (13 years 3 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2538 times:
I prefer 2-5-2 over 3-3-3. I´m always in the window seat, so the reason for my preference is obvious.
When I travel, it´s usually just me, me and a companion or my whole family of four. 2-5-2 is better for all these constellations as well.
About being stuck in the middle of the 5: this middle seat is the only "double excuse me seat"; on 3-3-3 you got the double amount: both window seats are "double excuse me".
I think the very best of all is 2-4-3 or 3-4-2, but unfortunately hardly any airline at all employs that
AT From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1049 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (13 years 3 months 1 day ago) and read 2492 times:
Yes, Emirates has 3-4-3 seating. But (they claim) their seat pitch is greater (34 inch) so that compensates!
I never noticed!
I like the 3-4-2 idea very much; a nice solution. That way groups of 2, 3, or 4 people travelling together can be accomodated. Swissair and KLM on their MD-11s have such an arrangement. Why don't airlines copy that for the 777?
Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 7, posted (13 years 3 months 1 day ago) and read 2485 times:
What's wit the odd #'ed mid-seats?
Dude, it must god-awful nauseating to be sitting in the middle seat when the plane banks slightly during roll turns. I know it'd be hard to notice it, but I don't like turning on my stomach, I do that in a roller coaster that lasts only a few minutes, 10-Q very much!
(Understandable, coasters are more savage and airliners fly level most of the time.)
large planes should be either: 2-2-2, 2-4-2 / 3-4-3, or 3-3-3-3 / 4-4-4.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
Fly_emirates From United Arab Emirates, joined Oct 2000, 1046 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2405 times:
3*3*3 is better i guess..
first of all its more comfortable for the passengers.. and its more convinient and easier for the flight attendants to serve the passnegers. in addition, if an evacuation shall be necessary, it will be easier rather than passengers step on each other
FlyVirgin744 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 1313 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2404 times:
If 2-4-3 causes imbalance, then you would think the first half of the plane could be 2-4-3, and the second half 3-4-2. Simple solution. Even better, just have the first part of the cabin 2-5-2, second 3-3-3, 3rd 2-4-3! That way everyone is satisfied!
No airline would have coach being 2-2-2 because that is the same number of seats abreast as a narrowbody 737/A320. I don't see how sitting in one of the middle seats of 2-4-2 is worse then being in the middle of 2-3-2 but you're entitled to that.
3-3-3-3?? Yeah a plane big enough for 3 aisles, that's pretty good. Is that a blended wing type thing?
4-4-4 is pretty good also, except for the poor soul sitting at the window! Even that would require another couple feet more width then the A380. In a charter layout, the A380 could support 3-5-3 which is only one more seat than 4-4-4. And imagine when serving food, the tray needs to be passed all the way down the row, or the FA could climb over everyone. Plus the pasenger would need to scream what they want so the FA could hear him/her since the he/she would be so far away.
3-6-3 has as many as 4-4-4 and may actually be possible because it is just as bad as the middle seat on 2-5-2, just another person with that dilemma in each row.
I myself prefer 2-5-2. I hate having a window and being 2 seats from the aisle. Atleast on 2-5-2 that only happens to one person, except he/she has no window. So I'll take my chances. Obviously 2-4-3 would be the best.
Checkout my website for more layouts and other cabin info:
Red Panda From Hong Kong, joined Jun 2000, 1521 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2372 times:
2-3-4 layout causes virtually no inbalance, but it would give pax and crews a feeling of inbalance only. (and that's why some airlines still use 2-3-4.) I personally prefer 3-3-3 instead of 2-5-2 since I don't wanna be thrown into the middle seat.
it would be great if there is 2-4-2 layout on 777.