Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
When Did 10 Abreast 777 Become Standard?  
User currently offlineArcano From Chile, joined Mar 2004, 2406 posts, RR: 24
Posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 17766 times:

Hi all

I remember the standard for years in coach for the 777 was 9 abreast in comfortable 3-3-3 configuration. Many times I've flown them, 772, 773 and 77W. Now AC is even changing them!

But now I see more and more airlines going 3-4-3, which was the standard for wider 747s. I know this is obvious for airlines, but what about pax? are the seats or the aisles getting thinner? Any compensation in terms of pitch or we're basically worse than before?

Thanks

Regards )( Arcano


in order: 721,146,732,763,722,343,733,320,772,319,752,321,88,83,744,332,100,738, 333, 318, 77W, 78, 773 and 380
49 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1761 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 17760 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

All it takes is one airline making the switch, making money and folks continuing to fly that airline. The move to 10 across on the 77W happened a while ago (EK for example). Other airlines with 77Ws may renovate to add the 10th seat because it will put $$ in their pockets for minimal cost. The average passenger apparently does not care.

Many of us on this board however do care. If I'm flying Y class, I will go out of my way to book an airline with more comfortable seating layouts on long haul flights. I don't have an issue paying a bit more in exchange for a bit more room.

I'll need to look but I don't recall any major airlines flying the 772 at 10 across on long haul flights. They are at nine across.


User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4923 posts, RR: 43
Reply 2, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 17744 times:

Quoting Arcano (Thread starter):
Now AC is even changing them!

For the record, AC is not changing B777s to 10 abreast. 5 new-build B777s coming in 2013 and early 2014 will be equipped with a 10 abreast Y cabin, as are the majority of B777s being built today. There has been no decision made to alter existing B777s.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9580 posts, RR: 52
Reply 3, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 17696 times:

Emirates was the first one to do it on a large scale and has been wildly successful. They have better than industry standard pitch. Aisles and seats are narrower. They are putting the same 17 inch width on the 777s that airlines have always been using on 737s and 757s for decades.

Here is an honest question to those who fear 10 abreast (or 9 on the 787). Could you honestly tell that the seats on wide bodies were bigger than on narrow bodies? Everyone seems to prefer the more open cabin, but can you feel 1 inch?

I have sat in a mockup with 9 and 10 abreast in the same interior. If I had no one next to me, I could not tell the difference. I only noticed it when sitting with someone on both sides. 10 abreast middle seats are tight, but for a window seat, I could not feel any difference since I tend to lean away from the middle seat anyway.

My final comment is that long haul economy is a miserable and uncomfortable experience regardless of your seat. It is the cheapest way to travel and airlines know that people care most about cost. A cheaper ticket would make them happier than 1 inch of width. We all appreciate better, but don't want to pay for it. Premium economy is coming and is a good option if you value a little more comfort or are a person of size.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineAT From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1022 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 17666 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 1):
If I'm flying Y class, I will go out of my way to book an airline with more comfortable seating layouts on long haul flights.

I agree with you. The question is, however, whether a seat in a 9-abreast configuration is necessarily more comfortable than one that is in a 10 abreast. For example, I have flown on countless Emirates 10-abreast 777s and do not find the seats any less comfortable than on United's or American's 777s. The aisles however seemed narrower, and may be that's largely what the 10th seat is cutting into.

I think the quality of the seat and seat cushion, shape, legroom, and width all combine to create a comfortable experience.


User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9580 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 17626 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 1):
Many of us on this board however do care. If I'm flying Y class, I will go out of my way to book an airline with more comfortable seating layouts on long haul flights. I don't have an issue paying a bit more in exchange for a bit more room.

I'll need to look but I don't recall any major airlines flying the 772 at 10 across on long haul flights. They are at nine across.

Air France has 10 abreast on long haul 777s. We also know their hard product in all classes lags their competition for comfort. Premium economy at 9 abreast is an interesting concept. Basically you are paying more for the width that was industry standard 15 years ago.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1761 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 17572 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AT (Reply 4):

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 1):
If I'm flying Y class, I will go out of my way to book an airline with more comfortable seating layouts on long haul flights.

I agree with you. The question is, however, whether a seat in a 9-abreast configuration is necessarily more comfortable than one that is in a 10 abreast. For example, I have flown on countless Emirates 10-abreast 777s and do not find the seats any less comfortable than on United's or American's 777s. The aisles however seemed narrower, and may be that's largely what the 10th seat is cutting into.

I think the quality of the seat and seat cushion, shape, legroom, and width all combine to create a comfortable experience.


I agree with your points. Where I think this would impact me most is the fact I'm a bit over 6'2" tall and the narrow seats translate to narrower shoulder width which isn't fun. The narrower seat doesn't matter to me given I can easily fit my bottom in the seat.

Despite the tight confines, a great on-board product can help make the experience a good one. EK for example has an excellent entertainment system, decent food and good service. I might deal with a trip in Y on EK but wouldn't consider the same trip for example on a U.S. based airline given the differences in service and product.


User currently offline817Dreamliiner From Montserrat, joined Jul 2008, 2290 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 17540 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 3):

  

I always wondered if one inch really does make a difference or even if its that noticeable in a 10 vs 9 abreast config on the 777. Truth is, you never really know until you've experienced it yourself... Even so, ive never flown in a 10 abreast config so I cant really same how bad it is compared to the 9, plus im not a large person, so my opinion of might differ to someone else.

But lets look on the bright side, the proposed 777X series is projected to have a 4 inch wider cabin...



Reality be Rent. Synapse, break! Vanishment, This World!
User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3606 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 17275 times:

I'm not sure I'd call 10 abreast the "standard". There are still plenty of airlines that fly 9 abreast, and more of those than fly 10 abreast, I'd imagine.


PHX based
User currently offlinetrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4741 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 17041 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Years ago TG had 10 across on their 777. I crawled onto one half asleep one night BKk to Nrt and thought I was on a 747 till I had to go to the bathroom- which weren't where they ought to be on a 747! Never noticed a problem with the seat. Mind you if it had been same plane all the way back to U S it may be different!

User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3733 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 17021 times:

In the USA, there are four major 777 operators. One is going to 10-abreast across the board, one is likely to stay 9-abreast, and one is currently 9-abreast but has a possibility of 10-abreast in the future. And the fourth-biggest US 777 operator doesn't take passengers.

AA is going to transition their 772ERs to 10-abreast (except in Main Cabin Extra), add AVOD, eliminate the F cabin, and replace the polish with paint starting midyear, which will bring the 772 in line for Y with AA's new 77Ws. AA's 772s are currently 9-abreast in Y.

DL is still 9-abreast, and refurbished all their 777s with new seating in both J and Y and AVOD in both classes not all that long ago. Since DL's 777 fleet is underutilized, I don't see that changing.

UA (both sUA and sCO aircraft) have both always been 9-abreast. The sUA planes were refurbed with AVOD and new seats in Y (3-3-3 instead of the original 2-5-2) not all that long ago, as were the sCO planes. But if UA orders 77Ws instead of converting their A350XWB-900 orders to A350XWB-1000s, I could see UA going for 10-abreast on the 77W to bring seating capacity in line with the 744s that need to be replaced.

And as an all-cargo airline, FX doesn't need seats in their 77L-Fs.



Primary Airport: FWA/Alternate Airport: DTW/Not employed by the FWACAA or their partners
User currently offlineArcano From Chile, joined Mar 2004, 2406 posts, RR: 24
Reply 11, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 16961 times:

Quoting AT (Reply 4):
The question is, however, whether a seat in a 9-abreast configuration is necessarily more comfortable than one that is in a 10 abreast.

I do care after I found that to travel long distance in the aisle of the middle 3 is one of the best way to cross oceans when travelling solo; the more chances to have the central seat empty, and if occupied more chances that the poor guy is a companion of the other central isle, so little chances you'll get disturbed and instant access to the aisle...

Quoting longhauler (Reply 2):
For the record, AC is not changing B777s to 10 abreast.

I'm afraid just wait and see

Regards!



in order: 721,146,732,763,722,343,733,320,772,319,752,321,88,83,744,332,100,738, 333, 318, 77W, 78, 773 and 380
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2762 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 16879 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 3):
My final comment is that long haul economy is a miserable and uncomfortable experience regardless of your seat.

Well, last year I flew in quick succession on a 9-abreast SQ 77W and on a 10-abreast JJ 77W, and one experience was definitely more miserable than the other.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1761 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 16287 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I think AA's decision on the 772s makes sense given their 77W config. I'll be interested in the reviews of the revamped 772s in Y class.

User currently offlinemplsjefe From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 15573 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 10):

DL is still 9-abreast, and refurbished all their 777s with new seating in both J and Y and AVOD in both classes not all that long ago. Since DL's 777 fleet is underutilized, I don't see that changing.

Thank the gods! We fly DL 77Ls quite a bit and would hate to see a change. We find the Y+ to be very comfortable, even on a 16 hour flight. We've been in Y too, and that was fine as well.

Two years ago we flew CDG-YYZ on an AF 773 in Y+ and couldn't believe the sight in Y. Looked horrid and all the pax on a very full flight looked absolutely miserable. The aisles looked smaller than the armrests. After that, we made a pact to never fly on a 777 3-4-3 configuration in Y ever.


User currently offlinedaviation From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 15449 times:

I have only flown 777s on CO and LY. I am a big tall guy, though not overweight (well, not much anyway). The 3-3-3 seats on those airlines were perfectly satisfactory. But I think I'd be singing a different tune if I had to endure a 10+ hour flight in a 3-4-3 configuration. I have flown trans-Atlantic on CO's 757s, but there was no one between my daughter (window) and I (aisle), so it was very comfortable. If we'd had a middle-seat companion, I don't think I would have been so happy.

User currently offlineJHCRJ700 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 15317 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 1):
Many of us on this board however do care. If I'm flying Y class, I will go out of my way to book an airline with more comfortable seating layouts on long haul flights. I don't have an issue paying a bit more in exchange for a bit more room.

It's traveler's like us that have given rise to premium economy. I'll gladly pay a little more for a little more room.

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 3):
My final comment is that long haul economy is a miserable and uncomfortable experience regardless of your seat. It is the cheapest way to travel and airlines know that people care most about cost. A cheaper ticket would make them happier than 1 inch of width. We all appreciate better, but don't want to pay for it. Premium economy is coming and is a good option if you value a little more comfort or are a person of size.

I couldn't agree more that flying long haul in econ is a miserable experience. I flew LHR-IAH three years ago on a 777 in econ. We were delayed at the gate for roughly 2 hours, taxied out and held for close to another hour, and then finally had a ten hour flight. I was fortunate there was a young child next to me so I could stretch my legs out under his seat because the equipment box was blocking mine. Lesson learned! No more long haul econ for me! It seems as though some of the Euro carriers premium long haul experience is well worth the price and offers quite a bit on top of just a little more room. Definitely worth the extra cost IMO.



RUSH
User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 4187 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 14950 times:

Quoting mplsjefe (Reply 14):
Two years ago we flew CDG-YYZ on an AF 773 in Y+ and couldn't believe the sight in Y. Looked horrid and all the pax on a very full flight looked absolutely miserable. The aisles looked smaller than the armrests. After that, we made a pact to never fly on a 777 3-4-3 configuration in Y ever.

Well, it was AF. They are not the best comparison for this purpose. I suppose that if BA did than that would be a more valid comparison.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25106 posts, RR: 22
Reply 18, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 14792 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 3):
I have sat in a mockup with 9 and 10 abreast in the same interior. If I had no one next to me, I could not tell the difference. I only noticed it when sitting with someone on both sides.

But with today's high load factors you're more likely than not to have someone next to you. And if you're in an aisle seat which I always prefer, the narrow aisles on the 10-abreast 777 also mean you're more likely to be bumped by people passing in the aisle (and by meal/drink trolleys).

I much prefer any other widebody, especially the 767 followed by the 2-4-2 A330/340, to a 10-abreast 777 and fortunately there aren't many routes where you don't have a more comfortable option.


User currently offlinequestions From Australia, joined Sep 2011, 769 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 13972 times:

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 10):
Since DL's 777 fleet is underutilized, I don't see that changing.

What do you mean they are underutilized?


User currently offlinedeltaflyertoo From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1647 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 13633 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 18):
I much prefer any other widebody, especially the 767 followed by the 2-4-2 A330/340, to a 10-abreast 777 and fortunately there aren't many routes where you don't have a more comfortable option.

Agreed. I was disappointed when I learned that the A350 was not going to be built on the AIrbus 330/300 2-4-2 standard. (BTW will the A350 be fitted to 10 abreast in economy? I know 9 for sure). Its mentioned that we on this board notice more than the flying public-that maybe true, BUT that is because was all in the know. I'm sure you quiz any average joe who just got off a 12 hour 10 abreast flight and they'll tell you no matter how good the food, great the staff and wonderful the IFE, something was indeed "off" that they felt overly cramped and uncomfortable.


User currently offlineSPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2245 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 13493 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 1):
and folks continuing to fly that airline

The #1 reason standards have gone where they have.

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 1):
The average passenger apparently does not care.

Same as above.



I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
User currently offlineCXfirst From Norway, joined Jan 2007, 3052 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 13366 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 1):
I'll need to look but I don't recall any major airlines flying the 772 at 10 across on long haul flights. They are at nine across.

EK does.

I have flown EK's 10-abreast configuration, and I have to say that I did not like it very much. The seat itself wasn't all too different, and I would say comfort depends on the seat itself (many 9-abreast carriers have worse seats), as well as other factors. In fact, I would argue the biggest thing affecting comfort on long-haul flights are IFE boxes under the seat.

However, on night flights, I enjoy aisle seats as they let me go stretch my legs without climbing over anyone, but on EK flights I kept on being bumped into, much more than any other airline.

-CXfirst



From Norway, live in Australia
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 23, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 13316 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 5):
Premium economy at 9 abreast is an interesting concept.

FYI, AC's proposed Y+ product for the 5 new-build 77W's is showing 8 abreast in a 2-4-2 arrangement. Only 24 seats, mind you. Perhaps that could be expanded at the cost of a few 'regular' Y seats.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25106 posts, RR: 22
Reply 24, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 13314 times:

Quoting CXfirst (Reply 22):
Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 1):
I'll need to look but I don't recall any major airlines flying the 772 at 10 across on long haul flights. They are at nine across.

EK does.

Also AF which converted their 772s from 9-abreast to 10-abreast at least a couple of years ago. KLM 772s are still 9-abreast while their 77Ws are 10-abreast.


25 GSPflyer : Sorry to nit-pick at your post, but FX is the third largest American 777 operator. DL is fourth. UA: 74 AA: 53 FX: 23 DL:18
26 tim : Living in Perth we have 777 options galore daily from Perth-Asia & the Middle East connecting to the USA/Europe. I go out of my way to fly Qatar o
27 neutrino : The key lies in the defination of "a bit" for both the squeeze and the moolah. What is the tipping point for how much more to ante up for how many fr
28 zeke : As far as I am aware, it is not standard, it is a customer option.
29 sailas : Back in 2005 i flew AF with the 772ER, and that had 9 abreast. Also i was on the last row with my friend where there are only 2 seats. I am 170cm and
30 Post contains images TGV : I have sat twice in a 10 abreast AF 777 in 2008 and vowed never to set foot again in such a cabin. Impossible to sleep since I was stuck both times b
31 enginebird : This could precisely be the reason for making Y seating as uncomfortable and service in Y as minimal as possible: To get people to pay extra for what
32 Post contains images KarelXWB : Airbus is/was studying a 10 abreast layout for the A350 and I believe AirAsia X is going for it. It will be a tight cabin![Edited 2013-02-11 00:43:19
33 bastew : I guess competitive advantage and potential revenue and yields will always dictate such decisions. The more airlines that adapt to the new layout, the
34 AirbusA6 : As I've said here many times, there is an inconsistency where airliners like EK and AF operate the 777 at 10Y, and also operate the much wider A380 at
35 rwsea : I've never flown 10-abreast economy and never will. I flew this January on AMS-BKK-AMS with KL's 773 in business class. I took a walk back to economy
36 cv990coronado : The 777 in 10 abreast is fantastic for the airline accountants but not for the passengers. My next trip is on QR in a 77W, EK have better timing but I
37 AAplat4life : Does anyone think that AA will have to rethink its 10 abreast seating if UA and DL stay with nine abreast in their 777s? It could be a competitive dis
38 skipness1E : Nope. Accountants have no relation to this subject matter, you are mixing accountancy up with airline yield management. They're not the same field at
39 raffik : I've flown both 9 abreast and 10 abreast and I personally cannot tell a difference. I'm not the slimmest guy around but I found the seat to be perfect
40 KarelXWB : I have no experience with both airlines but I'm interested to know why the Air France cabin is so bad and the EK cabin is better. Wider seats/aisles?
41 RussianJet : I personally don't agree with this. It can be so, but I don't find it always to be the case. Perhaps it's because God didn't bless me with great stat
42 cv990coronado : "Quoting skipness1E" "Accountants have no relation to this subject matter, you are mixing accountancy up with airline yield management. They're not th
43 Post contains images CXB77L : This phenomenon you speak of is not exclusive to the 777. It's happened before and it will happen again. 747s at launch came "standard" with a 3-4-2
44 FWAERJ : Didn't know that FX was third now. Thanks. With a growing number of airlines offering Y+ sections, I see 10-abreast becoming the de facto Y standard
45 aviasian : I flew on EK's 10-abreast B77W from Bangkok to Dubai and Houston ... and back. And even at a height of just 1.64m, I swear I would not fly this again
46 seabosdca : Yes, 1 inch is very noticeable, especially for those of us with wide shoulders. In a 17.2" seat (737/757/747/10Y 777), if I'm in a center seat, I phys
47 brilondon : I agree. I have broad shoulders and find that Y class is getting to be uncomfortably small. I believe that the airlines are just trying to keep the f
48 jayunited : I think you nailed the answer right there. Years ago Boeing advertised the 773 as a possible replacement for airlines aging 747 fleet. When you look
49 AirbusA6 : But there is a limit. How narrow can seats get, especially on 12 hour long haul flights, before there may be medical issues with lack of blood flow t
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...
EK Economy On 777 - 10 Abreast posted Tue Aug 31 2004 14:48:02 by CPT
When Did The 767's Get The New 777-style Interior? posted Wed Aug 21 2002 00:03:18 by QatarAirways
10 Abreast Seating On Lauda 777 posted Sat Feb 2 2002 17:46:32 by Flying-b773
Airbus A320 Enhanced - When Did Production Start? posted Sat Feb 9 2013 19:07:39 by JohnClipper
When Did UA Drop "come Fly The Friendly Skies" posted Mon Oct 15 2012 11:23:09 by g500
When Did LH Font Change In The 1960s? posted Mon Aug 13 2012 16:08:07 by LH707330
When Did Varig Begin Nagoya? posted Mon Aug 6 2012 08:43:02 by 28L28L
When Did Lufthansa Start SYD? posted Sat Aug 4 2012 03:13:11 by Jackbr
When Did JetBlue Serve ATL? posted Tue Jul 17 2012 17:44:24 by doulasc
Question:When Did AS Announce SEA-SAT? posted Tue Jun 26 2012 02:19:39 by RWA380