miaami From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 380 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 13520 times:
As per 24JUN12 GDS timetable and inventory display, American Airlines is to operate Boeing 777-300ER service on Los Angeles – London Heathrow route, starting 01JUN13. The 777-300ER will replace -200ER currently in operation.
AA136 LAX1950 – 1415+1LHR 77W D
AA137 LHR1105 – 1420LAX 77W D
As the 777-300's arrive this will free up some of the 777-200's. Hopefully we will see some new destinations annnounced soon.
flyguy1 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1691 posts, RR: 4 Reply 1, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13437 times:
2 of the JFK flights will be operated with the 777-300, as well.
I think some people here would disagree with this being an upgrade, with the new 3-4-3 seat being used on the 77Ws vs the 2-5-2 on the 200ERs. Honestly I dont see anything bad with it but, ive never experienced a 3-4-3 config yet. O well good to see it being used on more routes.
Blast Reality, Burst it into shreds! Banishment, This World!
jfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2644 posts, RR: 5 Reply 4, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13197 times:
If you have been in the middle of the 5 seats, you will see this as an upgrade
LDVAviation From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 747 posts, RR: 5 Reply 6, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13110 times:
Great choice. My partner flies this route quite often and the premium cabins are always oversubscribed.
slcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2450 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13088 times:
This should help to lower the per seat costs and it seems like a route they can sell the extra seats
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22021 posts, RR: 51 Reply 8, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 12927 times:
For reference the term is "upgauge" when it comes to capacity.
Upgrade is what is done to a passenger, or flight frequency.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8737 posts, RR: 52 Reply 9, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 12912 times:
Quoting 817Dreamliiner (Reply 2): I think some people here would disagree with this being an upgrade, with the new 3-4-3 seat being used on the 77Ws vs the 2-5-2 on the 200ERs.
It is certainly an upgrade in the premium cabins. The full flat business product is likely to be well received. With AA going up against 4 other airlines on LAX-LHR who all have flat products in business, I’d assume it is a desperately needed upgrade. As for economy, it depends on the airline as to who has the best product. If you don’t want 3-4-3 on a 777, take UA.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
spiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12850 times:
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 5): Next summer the 77W schedule is as follows:
AA 50 DFWLHR 445P 750A+ 77W
AA 136 LAXLHR 750P 215P+ 77W
AA 100 JFKLHR 610P 620A+ 77W
AA 138 JFKLHR 725P 740A+ 77W
817Dreamliiner From Montserrat, joined Jul 2008, 1402 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12762 times:
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 9):
It is certainly an upgrade in the premium cabins. The full flat business product is likely to be well received. With AA going up against 4 other airlines on LAX-LHR who all have flat products in business, I’d assume it is a desperately needed upgrade. As for economy, it depends on the airline as to who has the best product. If you don’t want 3-4-3 on a 777, take UA.
Well im just saying what others have said regards to the 3-4-3 configuration. And like I said in my previous post I dont see why and dont think it would be that bad, even though ive never flown one before, I never said I didnt want to fly one, not sure where you got that from.
Blast Reality, Burst it into shreds! Banishment, This World!
777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3031 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12532 times:
Quoting 817Dreamliiner (Reply 2): I think some people here would disagree with this being an upgrade, with the new 3-4-3 seat being used on the 77Ws vs the 2-5-2 on the 200ERs. Honestly I dont see anything bad with it but, ive never experienced a 3-4-3 config yet. O well good to see it being used on more routes.
It's worth pointing out that the 772s are going 3-4-3 as well, although it will probably take some time for them to all be converted.
scbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 11354 posts, RR: 50 Reply 13, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 12280 times:
Quoting miaami (Thread starter): AA136 LAX1950 – 1415+1LHR 77W D
AA137 LHR1105 – 1420LAX 77W D
Wait, am I reading this correctly? AA136 arrives at 14:15 then AA137 departs at 11:05 the next day? Using different equipment presumably? I can't believe AA would leave a 77W sitting at LHR for nearly 21 hours.
817Dreamliiner From Montserrat, joined Jul 2008, 1402 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 12268 times:
Quoting scbriml (Reply 13): Wait, am I reading this correctly? AA136 arrives at 14:15 then AA137 departs at 11:05 the next day? Using different equipment presumably? I can't believe AA would leave a 77W sitting at LHR for nearly 21 hours.
I doubt they would have it sitting at LHR for that long. It would probably do the return to JFK after.
Blast Reality, Burst it into shreds! Banishment, This World!
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2285 posts, RR: 7 Reply 15, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 12256 times:
Quoting 777STL (Reply 12): It's worth pointing out that the 772s are going 3-4-3 as well, although it will probably take some time for them to all be converted.
Yeah, from now on I'll be looking for 767 flights when I fly AA internationally in coach. The 777 used to be a treat; now I think it will be miserable in coach.
gingersnap From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2010, 851 posts, RR: 5 Reply 16, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 12185 times:
Quoting scbriml (Reply 13): Wait, am I reading this correctly? AA136 arrives at 14:15 then AA137 departs at 11:05 the next day? Using different equipment presumably? I can't believe AA would leave a 77W sitting at LHR for nearly 21 hours.
An inbound from JFK or DFW will operate the outbound to LAX. The inbound from LAX will operate out to JFK most likely.
ba319-131 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 8258 posts, RR: 56 Reply 17, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 12150 times:
The new JCL product looks good, though if travelling to/from LAX in YCL I'd be taking a BA flight for sure, 3-4-3 down back is just too right for my particular taste.
TWA1985 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 636 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 11932 times:
I'm shocked that ORD has not been announced yet! I thought the ORD-LHR route was huge for AA. I wonder if this is a sign of things to come for AA at ORD.
flyguy1 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1691 posts, RR: 4 Reply 19, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 11932 times:
A few years back, AA flew LAX-LHR, 2x per day. This will help makeup for that lost capacity.
LAXdude1023 From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6779 posts, RR: 25 Reply 20, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 11844 times:
Quoting TWA1985 (Reply 18): I'm shocked that ORD has not been announced yet! I thought the ORD-LHR route was huge for AA. I wonder if this is a sign of things to come for AA at ORD.
Why would it be? They havent put the 77W at MIA either and there is no doubt whatsoever that MIA is huge for AA.
DFW Fan Boy: Im crude, irreverent, and blunt, but Im not clueless. I offer no apologies.
laca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3742 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 10557 times:
Quoting 817Dreamliiner (Reply 2): I think some people here would disagree with this being an upgrade, with the new 3-4-3 seat being used on the 77Ws vs the 2-5-2 on the 200ERs. Honestly I dont see anything bad with it but, ive never experienced a 3-4-3 config yet. O well good to see it being used on more routes.
People have issue with the 10 abreast because the space is a lot tighter, especially when you take into consideration, the US has a very large population who are morbidly obese compared to the rest of the world.
laca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3742 posts, RR: 2 Reply 22, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 10559 times:
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 9):
It is certainly an upgrade in the premium cabins. The full flat business product is likely to be well received. With AA going up against 4 other airlines on LAX-LHR who all have flat products in business, I’d assume it is a desperately needed upgrade. As for economy, it depends on the airline as to who has the best product. If you don’t want 3-4-3 on a 777, take UA.
I feel NZ has the best product across the board in the LAX-LHR-LAX market (And, yes, I know they don't have a P cabin.). They really do a nice job with their catering as well compared to the rest, in particular, their Star partner, UA, which has some of the nastiest, cheapest food across the board. Even AA does a better job in catering.
817Dreamliiner From Montserrat, joined Jul 2008, 1402 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 10305 times:
Quoting laca773 (Reply 21): People have issue with the 10 abreast because the space is a lot tighter, especially when you take into consideration, the US has a very large population who are morbidly obese compared to the rest of the world.
Exactly and im aware of this, which is why I said some wouldnt think of it as much of an upgrade. I think the correct term would be upgauge but still an upgrade in my opinion. As for my opinion on the configuration, like ive said before ive never flown on a 3-4-3 on a 777, ive only flown on the 2-5-2 (AA) and the 3-3-3 (BA). Also im not a very large person so my opinion of it might differ to others.
Blast Reality, Burst it into shreds! Banishment, This World!
vincewy From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (10 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9681 times:
If you can only fly in Y, the "upgrade" is a sarcasm. Give me the middle of the 5 seats any day over the 3-4-3 seating, in fact, I'll choose 767, 757, or 737 with multi-stops. I don't think most people realize how cramped this seating is (especially first time a US carrier is trying it). Especially among JFK-LHR sector where BA will be flying with A380 and 777 with 3-3-3 seating.
25 mop357: I think its a bad idea even if your not a large person. I took a Frontier flight and sat next to a large person. She had the arm bar up on both sides
26 B747forever: What was the schedule/ flight number for that second flight?
27 sonomaflyer: For folks who don't like 3-4-3 seating in AA go with the competition. Air New Zealand, British and Virgin all have good service (Air NZ great service)
28 at: true- I've flown the dreaded 3-4-3 configuration on many a 777, including on very long-haul flights and find that what makes the difference here is t
29 skipness1E: NZ have nine abreast on the B777-200ER yet cram them in on the -300ER ten across. Not quite the treat in economy is used to be, especially on such a
30 sonomaflyer: While I get the gist of your statement, AA and BA have a joint venture so AA doesn't have to go all out on frequencies etc on that route. Having flow
31 DTWLAX: AA is not going up against BA. AA & BA have a JV and the profits are shared. It really does not matter who operates the route. Th eplane will lik
32 windowflyer: Congrats to AA on the new metal. However at 10 abreast I will not be going anywhere near it. Not if I'm flying economy anyway. For domestic flights I
33 olddominion727: I agree. But I love AA. I guess for my OW miles I will start flying BA. 2-5-2 is tight but tolerable. I am 6'4" and 295lbs. I really don't have an is
34 skipness1E: It most certainly does if you are flying down the back with the option of choosing nine or ten abreast. Indeed the BA product in all cabins is, in my
35 vincewy: AK/KL and NZ already did, and I thought BA tried and backed out. SQ's Scoot is also using 3-4-3, VS and EI do not have 777. Let's sum up who are putt
36 olddominion727: I know VS, US, & EI don't fly 777's for now, but never say never!
37 LHRXXXLHR: I've informed AA, in writing even, that their decision to choose 3-4-3 will force me to investigate other options. The response was an expected "we do
38 NYCAAer: Does anyone know which return flights from LHR to JFK be on the 77W?
39 AA767400: Correction - AA has 5 flights on JFK-LHR, along with BA's 7. And BA is not competition since it's ATI/JV. To be honest, I don't care for their 2x5x2
40 ripcordd: Either USAIR will change when they merge with AA or they will figure out they are making $$$ and in return DL/UA will start 10 across as well.
41 Flighty: Do what feels right, but honestly, AA cares more about the tens of thousands of passengers in the cabin today, right this minute. If they can fit 10-
42 gemuser: That is a gross assumption! I'll grant you it is a very personal reaction, but I would describe 3-4-3 on a B777 as a MAJOR reduction in comfort compa
43 vincewy: EK gives you 34-inch seat pitch so if you're as skinny as Mahatmad Gandhi, sure, it's very comfortable. Try 31-inch pitch on AF and you'll have diffe
44 mikey72: and..... Have no business being in the same paragraph. Lol Hats off to you though !
45 AirbusA6: If BA are flying most of the metal across the pond, with greater levels of comfort, isn't this a rather unequal partnership? Having flown with AF 3-4-
46 mikey72: Well let's face it the partnership across the Atlantic is more about added convenience for the 'business' class passenger in terms of the joint ventu
47 AirAfreak: It's always better late than never so great for AA to capture premium traffic... Personally, I would rather fly via ICN on OZ or KE to LHR than to sit
48 mikey72: I would trade DL, UA, US and AA for a well run PAN AM as the sole American 'national carrier' anyday. The LCC's and foreign carriers would have been
49 skipness1E: Ooops, we have the addition of the new AA138 this summer and I missed the recent return of AA100, indeed BA are up to EIGHT flights a day giving a to
50 lhrnue: I know all the discussion of frequency vs. capacity, but the A380 or 747-8i must real cash cows out of LHR to the main North America routes. I bet BA
51 cedarjet: Your lovely legacy carriers are pretty awful. Delta seem to be pretty good these days but poor old United, they used to be something really special a
52 mikey72: Have we forgotten why we get on a plane ? To get from A to B. My armchair at home is more comfortable than any airline seat and my 50inch flat screen
53 Viscount724: But not as good as 9-abreast. Why subject yourself to that kind of discomfort when there are so many better options, especially 7-abreast 767s. I wou
54 Sydscott: I would have thought a true Premium Economy product, ala BA, QF, NZ style etc, was made for someone of that stature to upgrade into. Personally thoug
58 skipness1E: So screw the majority? In all honesty, that is not the foundations of a succesful business. As someone once said, "We never forget you have a choice"
59 Sydscott: Exactly right. And time and again people have proven that at the back of the bus it's all about price. People have the choice and they choose to pay
60 mikey72: I've flown BA quite a few times across the pond in economy this year Skipness. At 6'2 I paid extra for the seats with more legroom so to be fair if s
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 380 posts, 
From Montserrat, joined Jul 2008, 1402 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, 
From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6779 posts, 
From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
