Thank god they scrapped that illogical 3-2-3 config though.
They havn't.... an airline can choose between 2+4+2, 3+2+2, 3+3+3, or 2+5+2. The 3+2+3 has actually recieved positive feedback from the surveys Boeing has done, and until you try it yourself, it might be a bit premature to write it off.
Many flyers prefer 3+3+3 in the 777 even though it is statistically "less comfortable" than 2+5+2.
As I might have stated b4. All customers will put in a very uncomfortable 3-3-3 config in coach. No matter what the marketing yabba tells us.
By that logic, all 777 opperators would be following EK
's model. And yet, only a small handful of 777 opperators seat 10 abreast. The 7E7 gives airlines the option
of seating 9 abreast, lowering seat/mile cost for charter and LCC airlines while increasing the aircraft's flexibility and resale value.
Then they will have a weight problem.
I assume you mean that a 7E7 in high-density configuration would be too heavy? The 7E7 is heavily "over-ranged," with 8,500nm avialable to the base model. The intention of this extra range was to allow airlines to carry lots of underfloor cargo, but this payload can be subsituted for human payload above deck.