Now hopefully I don't give non-leisure and non-charter airlines any ideas, but since the 3-4-3 777 and 3-3-3 787 have basically become the norm in terms of seat configuration, why hasn't the 767 also been given another seat in Y on major international carriers like AA, DL, UA, etc.? Will they consider it when they do an interior overhaul in the future? To my knowledge many charter/leisure airlines use the 2-4-2 configuration on their 767's, so it is possible.
Thoughts?
Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
Planes, Trains, and Cars... Heaven :)
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting a321luke (Thread starter): Now hopefully I don't give non-leisure and non-charter airlines any ideas, but since the 3-4-3 777 and 3-3-3 787 have basically become the norm in terms of seat configuration, why hasn't the 767 also been given another seat in Y on major international carriers like AA, DL, UA, etc.? |
In order to fit 8-abreast seating in a 767 the seat width is less than 17 inches and that is the minimum standard for most carriers who are not charter operators or Asian LCCs.
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting Stitch (Reply 1): In order to fit 8-abreast seating in a 767 the seat width is less than 17 inches and that is the minimum standard for most carriers who are not charter operators or Asian LCCs. |
I see. I wasn't aware of the minimum.
However, according to SeatGuru (is it credible?), Thomas Cook has 2-4-2 seating on their 767s, but the seat width shows to be exactly 17.0".
http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Tho...homas_Cook_Airlines_Boeing_767.php
Planes, Trains, and Cars... Heaven :)
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
Also, in order to accomodate 8 abreast, the 767 needs 8 doors instead of the normal 4 door w/4 overwing exits. In addition to the additional exit doors, the 767 floor also needs to be strengthened to accomodate the extra weight.
As a result, 8 abreast is not a viable retrofit option for most 767 operators.
As a result, 8 abreast is not a viable retrofit option for most 767 operators.
-
- flyingclrs727
- Posts: 2683
- Joined:
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
Wasn't Delta going to install Thompson Cozy Suites in their 763 economy cabins to get an effective 8-abreast configuration?
I still don't know why no airline has ordered these seats. They look like they would simultaneously improve passenger comfort and increase capacity.
http://www.thompsonaero.com/index.php/products/cozy-suite
I still don't know why no airline has ordered these seats. They look like they would simultaneously improve passenger comfort and increase capacity.
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting a321luke (Reply 2): However, according to SeatGuru (is it credible?), Thomas Cook has 2-4-2 seating on their 767s, but the seat width shows to be exactly 17.0". |
At 2+3+2 seat width is 18 inches and aisle width is 19 inches, so to fit 2+4+2 the seat and aisle width would need to be around 16.5 inches, respectively.
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
Not all airplanes lend themselves to multiple options for economy seat width.
Between 17 inches and 18 inches is the standard for economy seats for almost all airplanes. The 777 in 9 abreast is over 18 inches for a typical seat which is wider than normal, so you are seeing airlines go to the 17 inch seats which are on the narrower end. Similarly the 787 at 8 abreast is over 18.5 inches in width, so you are seeing airlines go towards 9 abreast.
The 767 has some of the widest economy seats, but it is close to 16 inch width to squeeze in 8 abreast. Similarly an A330 is about 16.5 inches width at 9 abreast, so you don't see mainline airlines putting those seats in.
A.net has a fascination with economy class seat width. Many 777 thread (before it gets locked for being off topic) and some 787 thread eventually brings up seat width since airlines have an option. I expect 8 abreast as an option on the 787 will eventually be completely phased out and forgotten. Reports are out there that the 777x will have slightly increased width to hopefully end that debate as well.
Between 17 inches and 18 inches is the standard for economy seats for almost all airplanes. The 777 in 9 abreast is over 18 inches for a typical seat which is wider than normal, so you are seeing airlines go to the 17 inch seats which are on the narrower end. Similarly the 787 at 8 abreast is over 18.5 inches in width, so you are seeing airlines go towards 9 abreast.
The 767 has some of the widest economy seats, but it is close to 16 inch width to squeeze in 8 abreast. Similarly an A330 is about 16.5 inches width at 9 abreast, so you don't see mainline airlines putting those seats in.
A.net has a fascination with economy class seat width. Many 777 thread (before it gets locked for being off topic) and some 787 thread eventually brings up seat width since airlines have an option. I expect 8 abreast as an option on the 787 will eventually be completely phased out and forgotten. Reports are out there that the 777x will have slightly increased width to hopefully end that debate as well.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
-
- tyler81190
- Posts: 720
- Joined:
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting flyingclrs727 (Reply 4): Wasn't Delta going to install Thompson Cozy Suites in their 763 economy cabins to get an effective 8-abreast configuration? |
I remember when that was first floated around. I thought at first, they looked super cozy. But then I wondered if they would be as easy to deal with in evacuation testing. Also might make it more confusing for seat numbering. (for the inexperienced traveler)
Also, do any other airlines have those seats installed?
Back on topic, I believe oneskyjet is correct in the need for the optional doors and floor strengthening for the added seats. Also, would there be an additional crew member required?
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
As someone who has flown Arkfly's OAK-AMS on a 2x4x2 767, I can honestly say that the flight absolutely miserable.
Not only are the seats slim with regard to width, but the aisles are narrower as well. I have never seen service carts so skinny.
I believe that the increased passenger capacity also requires an increased cabin crew compliment.
Not only are the seats slim with regard to width, but the aisles are narrower as well. I have never seen service carts so skinny.
I believe that the increased passenger capacity also requires an increased cabin crew compliment.
Not all who wander are lost....
-
- flyingclrs727
- Posts: 2683
- Joined:
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting tyler81190 (Reply 7): I remember when that was first floated around. I thought at first, they looked super cozy. But then I wondered if they would be as easy to deal with in evacuation testing. Also might make it more confusing for seat numbering. (for the inexperienced traveler) |
I would think it would be easier to evacuate. The seats fold up like theater seats giving floor room to stand when not sitting down. You can't really stand up very easily in a conventional row of seats with 31" pitch. According to the Thompson Aero configurations, a 757 could have 18.5" wide seats in 6 abreast seating, while a 787 could also have 18.5" wide seats in 9 abreast.
-
- MAN2SIN2BKK
- Posts: 104
- Joined:
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
Experienced the 2x4x2 Grockle format on a Britannia 767 between MAN and Salzburg in 85, bloody uncomfortable
-
- MaverickM11
- Posts: 18285
- Joined:
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting flyingclrs727 (Reply 9): I would think it would be easier to evacuate. The seats fold up like theater seats giving floor room to stand when not sitting down |
I heard people didn't like the seats at all in testing
I don't take responsibility at all
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
It's interesting that leisure carriers, like TOM, offer "premium economy" config on the 767 as 2-3-2. Essentially they offer normal economy seat width, however they do recline more and the soft product is better than charter economy.
The ex-first choice (FCA) config was 2-3-2 in both the premium economy (star class premier) and economy (star class) cabins. The economy cabin actually looked comfortable with a seat pitch of 33-34", so not your typical charter sardine can and better than BA. but having flown in premium, it was a much nicer flight with 38" pitch, more recline and seats that you could inflate air into. There's still a few TOM birds flying in the old FCA colours so I wonder do they still have the FCA cabin layout?
The ex-first choice (FCA) config was 2-3-2 in both the premium economy (star class premier) and economy (star class) cabins. The economy cabin actually looked comfortable with a seat pitch of 33-34", so not your typical charter sardine can and better than BA. but having flown in premium, it was a much nicer flight with 38" pitch, more recline and seats that you could inflate air into. There's still a few TOM birds flying in the old FCA colours so I wonder do they still have the FCA cabin layout?
-
- SpaceshipDC10
- Posts: 7054
- Joined:
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting MAN2SIN2BKK (Reply 10): Experienced the 2x4x2 Grockle format on a Britannia 767 between MAN and Salzburg in 85, bloody uncomfortable |
I really wonder how those who traveled with BY to Australia felt on arrival.
 Photo © Neville Murphy-Aviation Images Australia |  Photo © Brian Wilkes |
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting flyingclrs727 (Reply 4): http://www.thompsonaero.com/index.php/products/cozy-suite I still don't know why no airline has ordered these seats. They look like they would simultaneously improve passenger comfort and increase capacity. |
Looking at the photo, it simply staggers them to "increase" space width. I guess it might work, but one arm would be in front of the adjacent passenger. Bigger issue...looks like the overhead center (oxygen mask, light, etc.) would have to be staggered, too, which I would think could make it economically a no go.
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting planenutz (Reply 8): Not only are the seats slim with regard to width, but the aisles are narrower as well. I have never seen service carts so skinny. |
While I agree that 2-4-2 isn't the most comfortable around, the service carts are exactly the same regardless of cabin layout on the 767 (Atlas standard for those using them)
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
I have experienced 10 across on the 777 with Air New Zealand. These seats worked for a flight lasting 13 hours. I was afraid it would be to narrow as I am 6 ft 3 in an close to 200lb. The guy next to me was even larger. But it was much better than I feared. I have done 9 across in an A330 from Thomas Cook, and for 11 hours they were a pain. Bad seats too narrow. So there is a limit for me . 8 across in a 767 would be too narrow. I have also down Qatar 9 across for 14.5 hour flight. They are of course very good seats. But 10 across in a 777 is actually okay. 8 across in a 767. No way.
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
-
- longhauler
- Posts: 6488
- Joined:
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
I see Sunwing Airlines is flying YYZ-AMS again this summer, wet leasing a B767 from Arkefly in the 2x4x2 configuration. I sure hope it's cheap.
I too chuckled at the "Premium Comfort" cabin with a 2x3x2 configuration.
I too chuckled at the "Premium Comfort" cabin with a 2x3x2 configuration.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting spud757 (Reply 12): There's still a few TOM birds flying in the old FCA colours so I wonder do they still have the FCA cabin layout? |
They do, but the remaining aircraft in the fleet (G-OOBL/M) leave at the end of July so their days are numbered. They were refurbished the other year with the green leather replaced by Thomson blue, but they are essentially the same seats.
 Photo © Darren Wilson |  Photo © Darren Wilson |
Thomas Cook's 763's in 328Y are rather cosy;
 Photo © Darren Wilson |  Photo © Darren Wilson |
10 hours on one of them and you know you've had a long flight!
Darren
Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
-
- Viscount724
- Posts: 19316
- Joined:
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting a321luke (Reply 2): However, according to SeatGuru (is it credible?), Thomas Cook has 2-4-2 seating on their 767s, but the seat width shows to be exactly 17.0". http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Tho...homas_Cook_Airlines_Boeing_767.php |
I wouldn't trust that information. There's a lot of inaccurate seating data in SeatGuru.
2-4-2 on the 767 is so cramped it's only been (barely) acceptable for a very few charter/leisure carriers.
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 11): I heard people didn't like the seats at all in testing |
I can see how some would find it claustrophobic.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
-
- eta unknown
- Posts: 2906
- Joined:
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 13): I really wonder how those who traveled with BY to Australia felt on arrival. |
I can tell you the answer... it was so uncomfortable a VERY high percentage threw the return half of the ticket away and bought the cheapest one-way fare back to the UK on a scheduled carrier.
Also MK tried 8 abreast with their 762's and had to reconfigure to 7 across- too many complaints.
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
Thanks for the insight, guys. It makes sense now.
Just curious... did the 777 also have to have the floor strengthened to go 10 abreast?
Just curious... did the 777 also have to have the floor strengthened to go 10 abreast?
Planes, Trains, and Cars... Heaven :)
-
- SpaceshipDC10
- Posts: 7054
- Joined:
RE: Why Haven't Major Airlines 767s Become 2-4-2 In Y?
| Quoting longhauler (Reply 17): I too chuckled at the "Premium Comfort" cabin with a 2x3x2 configuration. |
And they must probably charge a lot for that so-called "premium comfort". Even TS is better there, though it's not difficult to be better than Sunwing. However I've seen that Condor offers three classes in it's 767 and none has 2-4-2.
| Quoting eta unknown (Reply 21): I can tell you the answer... it was so uncomfortable a VERY high percentage threw the return half of the ticket away and bought the cheapest one-way fare back to the UK on a scheduled carrier. |
I bet they have with such horrid comfort.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: aamd11, Arion640, Baidu [Spider], bamf777, Captaindoony, David_itl, davidjohnson6, flash330, garpd, goldcrest, HEXC, HNL, JonAlc, midexjet, migair54, Nicknuzzii, NolaMD88fan, outbackair, OzarkD9S, qf789, QF93, SASViking, shamrocka330, Tkt96, tphuang, trintocan, TropicalSky, Woodreau, xijiayu, YIMBY and 158 guests