Link/Source: https://nypost.com/2018/01/07/airline-w ... ing-seats/



"British Airways passengers will no longer be able to lean back and relax on short-haul flights as the airline seeks to slash ticket prices."
"The airline will fit non-reclining seats on 35 planes set to fly the economy class later this year."
"The change could leave BA’s elite status at risk, as it emulates budget airlines."
"Passengers have already complained BA is closely emulating budget competitors since the appointment of chief executive Alex Cruz in 2015, who formerly ran Spain’s low-cost Vueling carrier."
"BA will fit the seats on its new fleet of 35 Airbus A320neos and A321neos, which will come into service later this year."

It seems as if BA is now taking pages from the ULCCs on short haul flights. 1st no reclining seats. What will be next

Considering the seat pitch on BA, this might be an improvement.

I don’t think they would pull this trick on long haul, but you never know.

Went to Europe last spring and didn’t choose BA because of the things I read about onboard service, being able to pick a seat, etc. I don’t remember if it was cheaper or not, but no thanks.

On short haul flights I never recline my seat, even if flying in business class. I simply try to make use of the time to work...

Most low-costs (at least in Europe) have this system. I like not being annoyed but someone's else need to recline his or her seat. For me it is an improvement.

seahawk wrote:

Considering the seat pitch on BA, this might be an improvement.

Yeah, this lifts them in my eyes.

The statement is quite shocking - that's true.

But when you see the amount of room which they get by fitting the cabins with these new seats most of the pax do not complain about. In fact, Alex Cruz already left Vueling's fleet with this project on, and most of the IAG's Vueling new cabins come like that. Vueling's A321 have 220 seats, which is max. density for that cabin I believe. However, they are all fitted with this seats and they are not that bad really.

seahawk wrote:

Considering the seat pitch on BA, this might be an improvement.

Here's an article about it (in Dutch):

https://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/nieuws/ ... te-op-a320

It says they'll add some extra rows and therefor the seat pitch is being reduced. Not exactly an improvement if you ask me, Ryanair offers more legroom than British Airways.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

seahawk wrote:

Considering the seat pitch on BA, this might be an improvement.

Here's an article about it (in Dutch):

https://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/nieuws/ ... te-op-a320

It says they'll add some extra rows and therefor the seat pitch is being reduced. Not exactly an improvement if you ask me, Ryanair offers more legroom than British Airways.

So that is exactly the Vueling product then.

I’ve no issue with these non reclining seats, given the tighter seat space, it actually makes sense.

This seams like click bait for the NY Post including the title of this post & of the article. No where in the article other than title did it say what "poor door" was, nor did it give any reason for the phrase. It's sad how desperate the news companies are that they have to enhance a title with Fake subject to get someone to repost a link to it.

How about just saying in the title "what do you think about BA adding non reclining seats" After all that is ALL the article talks about!

ba319-131 wrote:

I’ve no issue with these non reclining seats, given the tighter seat space, it actually makes sense.

I don't either. Actually, for short hauls I think I prefer them, as it stops someone reclining their seat in front of me. For short hauls where you want to read a book this is actually a positive.

However from a club europe perspective the hard product is hardly business class anymore, but then I guess has not been for a long time.

Vueling seat pitch really sucks. I am a regular sized person at 180 cm hight but cannot fit into a Vueling seat at all. I like the Vueling product actually - living in BCN I have to. But the seat pitch really makes me look for alternatives. If BA does the same I will do everything posssibke to not fly them. With Brexit looming that shouldn’t be a problem .

Richard28 wrote:

ba319-131 wrote:

I’ve no issue with these non reclining seats, given the tighter seat space, it actually makes sense.

I don't either. Actually, for short hauls I think I prefer them, as it stops someone reclining their seat in front of me. For short hauls where you want to read a book this is actually a positive.
However from a club europe perspective the hard product is hardly business class anymore, but then I guess has not been for a long time.

I agree I prefer them. Removing the reclining option on tightly pitched economy seats is an improvement that avoids arguments and disables selfish people from one method of showing that they have no consideration for their fellow human beings.

BA seems to be leading the way towards narrowing the gap between traditional carriers and LCCs.

I have to admit that I was a bit surprised with the BoB system that was implemented on the European flights. I thought this was going to be limited to UK Domestic. Guess I was wrong.

Regarding the other ticket conditions of the bottom tier, it is very much like the LCCs. No bags, no seat selection, etc.

Now, reduced pitch, high density non reclining seats. Generally, before I feel any inclination to recline, I normally check to see what the passenger behind me is doing. If he/she is reclined, then I feel no obligation not to. If he/she is not reclined, I will not recline. That is just me. I have been on some carriers who have comfortable fixed-positioned seats, and I have been on others who have uncomfortable fixed position seats.

Since BA, followed by other carriers, have adopted the LCC model, I have to ask, what is the motivation of airline loyalty? Points? At what point does one lose sight of the value added?

I will not go to BA to be treated like crap. I can get that cheaper from a real LCC.

Tom

In Addition in the 321 one toilet will disapear

Will BA go for 230-240 seats in their new A321NEO?

Acro, the UK aircraft seat manufacturer claim their super-slim seat offers 31-inch-pitch-feel even when the seats are spaced at 28 inches. Are BA going for those? Jet2 is the biggest user of those seats, I believe...

This seems like the way going forward with all short-haul routes...LCC's have stamped their model on the industry as a whole...


Faro

rbavfan wrote:

This seams like click bait for the NY Post including the title of this post & of the article. No where in the article other than title did it say what "poor door" was, nor did it give any reason for the phrase. It's sad how desperate the news companies are that they have to enhance a title with Fake subject to get someone to repost a link to it.

How about just saying in the title "what do you think about BA adding non reclining seats" After all that is ALL the article talks about!

I believe "poor door" is a reference to the recent announcement that BA will shortly instigate a boarding system that prioritises those who have paid the most for their seats.
Presently its assistance required, people with small children, elites, them boarding by reverse row number.
In future the first three will be the same, after that it will be board according to how much you paid for your seat, giving the overhead locker space to those who paid the most.

TP has the same non-recline super slim seats on some a320 (flown LIS HEL overnight). i guess from row 15th backwards...I guess this race to the bottom will involve all airlines, therefore CR9 will be much more appreciated as they still recline.

Richard28 wrote:

ba319-131 wrote:

I’ve no issue with these non reclining seats, given the tighter seat space, it actually makes sense.

I don't either. Actually, for short hauls I think I prefer them, as it stops someone reclining their seat in front of me. For short hauls where you want to read a book this is actually a positive.

... or if you want to work on your laptop. I always panicked when I had my laptop open and the passenger in front of me reclined his/her seat.

I would love to see some actual poll data on this, because I'd be pretty sure the majority of UK customers don't want reclining seats on short haul - due to the annoyance of the person in front reclining into you when almost no-one is trying to sleep or rest. A quick search on mumsnet for example showed lots of threads with support for banning reclining seats!

This is the customers leading BA. All their short haul routes are under threat from the big LCCs, they have to get their costs and prices in line with the competition. I suspect they have a fairly elderly loyal customer base but they need to build a younger following.

Geoff

Great news, who needs to recline their seat on a short flight anyway. And no inconsiderate moron in front reclining back into my lap.

There’s been a lot of press about this but most news outlets have completely missed the real story.

The specification for the new Airbus aircraft was done by IAG, not BA. This is IAG standardising new deliveries of aircraft across all group airlines to take advantage of bulk purchase discounts and so they can move aircraft between airlines quickly if necessary.

LHRFlyer wrote:

The specification for the new Airbus aircraft was done by IAG, not BA. This is IAG standardising new deliveries of aircraft across all group airlines to take advantage of bulk purchase discounts and so they can move aircraft between airlines quickly if necessary.

Adding that this a race to the bottom, meeting LCC standards instead of BAs. Which is happening in several aspects, step by step, towards losing the "legacy" consideration for IB and BA ( and making 1 product, different branches, VY, IB2, Level...).

The reclining in economy these days is so minimal, I don't understand how it's still much of an issue for short haulI, for both sides of the argument. Personally I like reclining about half way simply because I find the up-right nature of airplane seats to feel somewhat unnatural. Maybe airlines that don't want to allow reclining should find a middle ground for fixed seats that would somewhat satisfy both recliners and non-recliners.

Yes, I'm sure ticket prices will be slashed, lol.

There is nothing wrong with offering LCC level service as long as ticket prices match LCC competitors.

The issue with legacies, ticket price matching aspect soon disappears and replaced with excuses about legacy cost structure, unions, brand ...

End result, LCC service at a Legacy price.

Imagine the furor if this was being done by FR....oh wait
Interesting the first few comments so far, BA does have significant pull so.....

Lots of mainline carriers are making low cost moves (like no more reclining seats) but it is really not a big deal to me at all. Sometimes, all you want to do is get from A to B as cheap as you can possibly get. Some flights I've been on have been bad but it doesn't bother me. Having a bad flight may be inconvenient, but it's not the end of the world.

FWIW the origin of the story is The Sun, The NY Post merely reissued the story.

GCT64 wrote:

Removing the reclining option on tightly pitched economy seats is an improvement that avoids arguments and disables selfish people from one method of showing that they have no consideration for their fellow human beings.

29 inch pitch and non-reclining seats also shows how BA has no consideration for their fellow human beings.

This is an improvement, not a downgrade. There is absolutely no need to recline your seat on a short-haul EU flight, and doing so with the very tight seat pitches of nowdays is extremely inconsiderate to say the least.

The real problem is BA's new seat pitch in the first place.

r2rho wrote:

This is an improvement, not a downgrade. There is absolutely no need to recline your seat on a short-haul EU flight, and doing so with the very tight seat pitches of nowdays is extremely inconsiderate to say the least.

The real problem is BA's new seat pitch in the first place.

Wait, i have absolutely no problem with 29" pitch or 16" wide seats. I do like reclining. So why is your preference any more valuable than mine? See the problem?
Using that same line of thought, there is absolutely no need for: more then 28" pitch, lavatories, beverage service, cabin air quality, storage bins, etc. We can all endure an hour or 2 without many of the amenities that we have today.

airbazar wrote:

The reclining in economy these days is so minimal, I don't understand how it's still much of an issue for short haulI, for both sides of the argument. Personally I like reclining about half way simply because I find the up-right nature of airplane seats to feel somewhat unnatural. Maybe airlines that don't want to allow reclining should find a middle ground for fixed seats that would somewhat satisfy both recliners and non-recliners.

Wasn't there talk of seats that don't recline but the seat slide forward instead? Wasn't one of the major Asian carriers going to adopt those?

At least that way it's a semi-recline for the person in front (who for some reason can't sit upright for 2 hours), while not forcing the person behind to eat their sandwich off the person in front's forehead.

ryanov wrote:

Went to Europe last spring and didn’t choose BA because of the things I read about onboard service, being able to pick a seat, etc. I don’t remember if it was cheaper or not, but no thanks.

I must concur. While I had an overall good experience in my recent BA flight, I was surprised that I was - supposedly - flying a legacy carrier and I wasn't allowed to pick a seat at no extra charge (unless I waited until within 24 hours of the flight). Not a big deal, but not what I expected.

As for the reclining seats strategy, I'm not sure I mind, for short haul. I recently flew in two of F9's somewhat new A320s with the non-reclining ultra slim seats, for 3 hours each leg, and it really wasn't bad. Legroom was pretty decent and, as others have said, it did prevent the person in front of me from reducing my usable space.

Interesting seems the majority don't want the 'reclining' Y seat.I bet BA did their research and found out exactly that.
The fact that I don't like them also of course means nothing but just one more vote.

I am with the guy who recently (on a different thread) stated that the lack of seat bottom padding on these new slimline seats was the real issue.I would agree with that!

Would be interested to know about the 'slide forward' seat mentioned above though.

alan3 wrote:

airbazar wrote:

The reclining in economy these days is so minimal, I don't understand how it's still much of an issue for short haulI, for both sides of the argument. Personally I like reclining about half way simply because I find the up-right nature of airplane seats to feel somewhat unnatural. Maybe airlines that don't want to allow reclining should find a middle ground for fixed seats that would somewhat satisfy both recliners and non-recliners.

Wasn't there talk of seats that don't recline but the seat slide forward instead? Wasn't one of the major Asian carriers going to adopt those?

At least that way it's a semi-recline for the person in front (who for some reason can't sit upright for 2 hours), while not forcing the person behind to eat their sandwich off the person in front's forehead.

That is the only acceptable way to justify the seat. Otherwise recliners in short-haul should be banned, and in long-haul reclining should be allowed only when all do that.

It could cause injuries to recline the seat if the person behind holds a rigid object on her lap or just has longer than average legs.

Most non-reclining slimline seats are pre-reclined 2-3 inches or a few degrees, so you are not sitting totally upright anyway.

Not many people on this thread have picked up on the fact that BA are also adding more rows & seats to each A319/320/321.
BA call it "Densification" program.... More and More seats....less and less space.

TUGMASTER wrote:

Not many people on this thread have picked up on the fact that BA are also adding more rows & seats to each A319/320/321.
BA call it "Densification" program.... More and More seats....less and less space.

Exactly. But unfortunately, on a lot of airline boards, the response to concenrs about continued addition of more seats seems to be "oh well, people want cheap prices. if they don't like being treated like a battery hen they should upgrade to F and stop complaining".

That's the bigger issue. The removal or reduction of the recline should be a given. You can't take away pitch and not take away recline.

You can't have uncomfortable 320s at six across. The extra half inch over 737s makes that impossible because it's the only metric that counts.

Theory, meet Test. I once introduced these two on a long haul LH 346 out of SFO in Economy and it ended in abysmal failure. But then LH didn't have that neat no reclining seat feature, might've made a difference. Best case laughs scenario, by next summer Ryanair is advertising itself as the "Premium Comfort" short haul airline of the UK.

As a counterargument: as a taller-than-average person, the contouring on the BA seats as they are now causes real lumbar problems (the bumps are just not where they need to be for me), and 1-2 inches of recline really helps the comfort level. The non-reclining exit row seats leave me in pain on a one hour LHR-GVA flight.

Honestly, this is just another reason to connect in MAD and fly IB (until they pull the same trick of course).

There is nothing inconsiderate about reclining your seat on a short flight. That's snowflake talk. I recline my seat the minute the plane leaves the runway, every time. If you don't like the fact that I purchased a seat and have the ability to recline, then buy Business or First.

[photoid][/photoid]

FriscoHeavy wrote:

There is nothing inconsiderate about reclining your seat on a short flight. That's snowflake talk. I recline my seat the minute the plane leaves the runway, every time. If you don't like the fact that I purchased a seat and have the ability to recline, then buy Business or First.

Well then I might "accidentally" bump against your seat through the entire flight, if I can't reach my bag, or see my TV screen properly, or fold out my tray up and down, or get out of the seat that I paid for.

If people can't sit for an hour-long flight without having to lie back like they're in a dentist chair I would suggest they call a chiropractor.

BA did the right thing.

I for one enjoy being able to adjust my seat for more comfort, even on a short hop. But it is what it is. Sad to see BA go this route.

TUGMASTER wrote:

Not many people on this thread have picked up on the fact that BA are also adding more rows & seats to each A319/320/321.
BA call it "Densification" program.... More and More seats....less and less space.

A319's not being densified. Will be shipped to Gatwick as neo's arrive and some retirements (mainly ex bmi birds).

What I find the most bizarre about this is the Heathrow fleet is being densified before LGW which will remain the same for the time being. I guess they may be able to pay off the costs of fitting the seat quicker at LHR due to higher yielding passengers rather than bucket and spade.

What is also bizzare is the current seating has only been in since 2014. Presumably these costs for the black coloured seats are being written off? I personally thought this cabin looked the part. Two toilets are also being built into the wall of the back galley to allow the extra seats.

You only have to look to flyertalk to see how BA are p*ssing off the high value frequent flyer base. Chasing ryanair passengers from the worlds most premier and premium airport.

Arion640 wrote:

What is also bizzare is the current seating has only been in since 2014. Presumably these costs for the black coloured seats are being written off? I personally thought this cabin looked the part. Two toilets are also being built into the wall of the back galley to allow the extra seats.

You only have to look to flyertalk to see how BA are p*ssing off the high value frequent flyer base.

The current brown seats are not being wasted. If you're removing the seats from rows 12/14 back, you give them a quick bit of maintenance the put them on your brand new NEOs at the front. It means you're not wasting the investment of the current seats at all. It's pretty smart when you think about it.

The two toilets in the wall is the space saving galley configuration offered by Airbus. I've experienced this on the SAS A320 NEO. They are small, but seriously, how long do you spend in a toilet and how much space do you need? The only issue is the fact the hand towels are in the wall above the toilet, so your hands drip all over the toilet seat or lid while getting the hand towels. No big deal but not ideal.

Regarding FlyerTalk, the BA board there is skewed by the fact that everyone there loves a moan. Any compliment gets about 3 replies, where the moans get threads going on for days. I would hardly use that as a bell weather for customer sentiment. That being said, things are grim when it comes to the public's perception of BA, hence the announcements like today's improvements to the World Traveller catering from 17 January. They're fixing what they broke.