New AC 777 Configs Released

briguychau · Fri Aug 21, 2015 7:57 am

AC released the new 777 configs on its website today. The entire 777 fleet should be refitted by June 2016, based on an earlier press release.

Seat maps: http://www.aircanada.com/en/about/fleet/index.html

New 77L config:
40J-24W-236Y (300 seats total, up from 42J-228Y 270 seats)

New 77W configs:
40J-24W-336Y (400 seats total, up from 42J-307Y 349 seats)
28J-24W-398Y (450 setas total, down from 36J-24W-398Y 458 seats)

The second 77W config is just replacing the J section on the current HD 777s with the 787 J seats. The first 77W config and the 77L are full cabin refits. Not surprisingly, all Y sections are 3-4-3 with 31-inch pitch and 17-inch width.

questions · Fri Aug 21, 2015 8:29 am

The race to the bottom in Y continues.

LAX772LR · Fri Aug 21, 2015 8:51 am

Quoting questions (Reply 1):
The race to the bottom in Y continues.

Would you expect anything else for something that's priced cheaper (in "real" value) now than it was 20yrs ago, despite the (real and nominal) cost to provide it having skyrocketed since?

Thomaas · Fri Aug 21, 2015 12:31 pm

I'm surprised they are refitting the High Density 77W with new business class seats since they already offered all isle access anyway and were also quite new. They're basically sacrificing revenue for product consistency.

WildcatYXU · Fri Aug 21, 2015 12:55 pm

I can only hope AC will keep W fares at reasonable level. I just won't be traveling longhaul on these in Y and can't afford J (except for summer TATL sales).

auroralives · Fri Aug 21, 2015 1:24 pm

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 4):
I can only hope AC will keep W fares at reasonable level. I just won't be traveling longhaul on these in Y and can't afford J (except for summer TATL sales).

Currently running in the 3 class config on YUL - CDG. Random (October 7) sample one way (all in) fares are: Y-$371 W-$941 J-$1941

Looks like 2.5x for W over Y

sunrisevalley · Fri Aug 21, 2015 1:29 pm

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 4):
I can only hope AC will keep W fares at reasonable level.

What do you think a reasonable spread is? For example I think the NZ spread is bordering on extortion.

jfk777 · Fri Aug 21, 2015 1:45 pm

This standardizes all the 777 and new 787 J class seats, right now the first set of 777 have one type of seat and the 777 HD another. Sadly now all 777 get 10 seats per row too.

WildcatYXU · Fri Aug 21, 2015 1:48 pm

Quoting auroralives (Reply 5):
Currently running in the 3 class config on YUL - CDG. Random (October 7) sample one way (all in) fares are: Y-$371 W-$941 J-$1941

Looks like 2.5x for W over Y

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 6):
What do you think a reasonable spread is? For example I think the NZ spread is bordering on extortion.

I wouldn't hesitate to pay for the cheapest W ticket (I think that would be N fare on international routes) twice the price of the cheapest Y fare. In case of the example from above, I'd go for the 2.5x too. That's about as far as I'd go.

[Edited 2015-08-21 07:39:25]

neromancer · Fri Aug 21, 2015 1:58 pm

Quoting auroralives (Reply 5):
Currently running in the 3 class config on YUL - CDG. Random (October 7) sample one way (all in) fares are: Y-$371 W-$941 J-$1941

Looks like 2.5x for W over Y

Ouch. Going from a 19" seat width to 17" in Y. Looks like I won't be flying Air Canada long haul any more.
Also only 24 seats in W? I'd be willing to pay 1.5x for W over Y but 2.5x? I suppose the reason for only 24W seats is beacuse it's 2.5 x over Y fares.

With my company I can justify paying a little more for W but not 2.5x.

If Air Canada doubled W to 48 seats and charged 2 x Y fares their overall revenue would be a little higher.
(28J x 48W x 368Y)

Or 72W at 1.7 x Y fare.
(28J x 72W x 338Y)

WildcatYXU · Fri Aug 21, 2015 2:44 pm

Quoting neromancer (Reply 9):
With my company I can justify paying a little more for W but not 2.5x.

From that standpoint I'm lucky. While the probability of me going to an international business trip is close to zero, our policy allows Z fares outside North America (opposed to what they call lowest logical fare in NA) .

Quoting neromancer (Reply 9):
If Air Canada doubled W to 48 seats and charged 2 x Y fares their overall revenue would be a little higher.
(28J x 48W x 368Y)

Or 72W at 1.7 x Y fare.
(28J x 72W x 338Y)

The question is if they would find enough customers willing to pay for it. I don't think lowest logical fare companies would go for it.

chrisa330 · Fri Aug 21, 2015 4:51 pm

Looks like 2.5x for W over Y

They've loaded PE fares for many ex-YYZ markets now that the configs have been released, and the spread isn't the same for all routes.

eg: YYZ-HKG in June 2016 it's a 40% mark up from lowest Y to PE. YYZ-LHR is slightly less then double.

So it is market specific, and YUL-CDG is typically a lower yielding route (hence the 777HD being deployed), so it might not be that PE is high, but Y is lower than you might expect.

cnz3 · Fri Aug 21, 2015 8:20 pm

I was expecting this to come out soon.

I've already booked W on the 787 to do YYZ-LHR in April, so that will give me a base point for either going with W on these new 777 configs or just avoiding them altogether below J, because as a large man, 3-4-3 in Y won't work as my space requirements would affect other passengers too much.

I try to fly J as much as I can, and it actually does help knowing that they will be phasing out the staggered business seating. I flew in those type of seats with Delta on a 764 BOS-LHR, and although it wasn't bad, the new style business pods are much better in my opinion (flown in them too, in short haul YHZ-YYZ).

krisyyz · Fri Aug 21, 2015 9:16 pm

Will the increase in seats, and thereby passengers and bags affect the range or cargo payload of the 777s, especially the 77Ls?

This change won't lead me to avoid AC, completely, but I will definitely shop around even more now, or look at AC's A330 or 767 flights before taking a 777 or 787.

I also noticed one of the new configs has 8 washrooms for 422 pax, that the industry standard?

KrisYYZ

WildcatYXU · Fri Aug 21, 2015 9:36 pm

Quoting krisyyz (Reply 13):
This change won't lead me to avoid AC, completely, but I will definitely shop around even more now, or look at AC's A330 or 767 flights before taking a 777 or 787.

You'll be only able to do that for limited time.

Quoting krisyyz (Reply 13):
I also noticed one of the new configs has 8 washrooms for 422 pax, that the industry standard?

Actually, this may be even worse, as nobody knows if the washrooms between W and J are meant for J passengers or for W and Y passengers. If these 2 washrooms are dedicated to J, it means 6 washrooms for 422 pax on a longhaul plane. The lack of dedicated washrooms for W is disappointing.

JoeCanuck · Fri Aug 21, 2015 11:20 pm

I when did Thomson buy AC?

whitelight44 · Sat Aug 22, 2015 12:57 am

This is very sad, seating in a 17 inch wide seat for a 15 hour long flight from Toronto to Hong Kong puts pax well being at risk. Boeing is so stupid to allow them to do 3x4x3. Someone should really speak out for the well being of passengers onboard planes these days on such tight seats.

res77W · Sat Aug 22, 2015 3:21 am

Quoting whitelight44 (Reply 16):

I agree, but airlines care about one thing and one thing only...$$$

United Airline · Sat Aug 22, 2015 3:37 am

I did HKG-YVR-HKG on AC back in March and it was terrible. Baby seats, the aisle is so narrow that you hit someone easily.

CI has joined the club. Who else will be joining?

n7371f · Sat Aug 22, 2015 5:56 am

Quoting whitelight44 (Reply 16):

This is very sad, seating in a 17 inch wide seat for a 15 hour long flight from Toronto to Hong Kong puts pax well being at risk. Boeing is so stupid to allow them to do 3x4x3. Someone should really speak out for the well being of passengers onboard planes these days on such tight seats.

Boeing has nothing to do with it. Blame the finance guys.

That said, going forward the key is to design a fuselage width that makes 17" nearly impossible. Boeing thought they did that with the 787 with great economics but ...

bmacleod · Sat Aug 22, 2015 5:38 pm

Quoting United Airline (Reply 18):
I did HKG-YVR-HKG on AC back in March and it was terrible. Baby seats, the aisle is so narrow that you hit someone easily.

The AC 777 doesn't seem any narrower than other 777 cabins....

http://www.airlinereporter.com/wp-co.../uploads/2013/09/Economy-Class.jpg

[Edited 2015-08-22 10:40:28]

KLSMB · Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:46 am

Seems that Air Canada is following the same path that many others have already gone down. Wider seats were one of Air Canada's selling points for me.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 4):
I just won't be traveling longhaul on these in Y and can't afford J (except for summer TATL sales).

Quoting neromancer (Reply 9):
Ouch. Going from a 19" seat width to 17" in Y. Looks like I won't be flying Air Canada long haul any more.

Quoting krisyyz (Reply 13):
This change won't lead me to avoid AC, completely, but I will definitely shop around even more now, or look at AC's A330 or 767 flights before taking a 777 or 787.

Quoting whitelight44 (Reply 16):
This is very sad, seating in a 17 inch wide seat for a 15 hour long flight from Toronto to Hong Kong puts pax well being at risk.

Quoting United Airline (Reply 18):
I did HKG-YVR-HKG on AC back in March and it was terrible. Baby seats, the aisle is so narrow that you hit someone easily.

While I agree with all of these comments, I'm interested about how the narrower 17" Y seats have affected other airlines that are already offering them on their 777s (Emirates, Lufthansa, and Air France to name a few)?

whitelight44 · Sun Aug 23, 2015 6:27 am

Quoting KLSMB (Reply 21):
While I agree with all of these comments, I'm interested about how the narrower 17" Y seats have affected other airlines that are already offering them on their 777s (Emirates, Lufthansa, and Air France to name a few)?

At least the good thing is that they get low ratings on skytrax and if they really care about their brand and reputation they will do something about it. Thankfully there are so many complaints online on skytrax for airlines with tight seat width and Air Canada has quiet a few of those complaints too since the time they introduced the horrible 3x4x3 configuration.

JoeCanuck · Sun Aug 23, 2015 6:28 am

Quoting KLSMB (Reply 21):
While I agree with all of these comments, I'm interested about how the narrower 17" Y seats have affected other airlines that are already offering them on their 777s (Emirates, Lufthansa, and Air France to name a few)?

Emirates led the charge with 17", 10 abreast in their 777's, and they've been doing it for over a decade. They have pretty good load factors, and most seem to be following suit, so it's a good bet that 10 abreast is a money maker.

longhauler · Sun Aug 23, 2015 10:58 am

Quoting res77W (Reply 17):
I agree, but airlines care about one thing and one thing only...$$$

If an airline wants to be successful, they, like all companies, care about one thing ... and that is giving the customer what the customer wants. A company is doomed that tries to tell the customer what the customer wants, instead of listening.

If customers chose an airline by anything other than fare, then the on-board experience would be very different.

I looked at the routes AC originally flew the HD B777s with interest. YVR-HKG against CX and YVR-LHR against BA. The result ... there was ZERO resistance against the 10 abreast B777s when competing with the 9 abreast B777s. So ... if people chose by seat width, instead of fare, then seats would be pulled out of aircraft instead of being installed.

JoeCanuck · Sun Aug 23, 2015 7:49 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 24):

If an airline wants to be successful, they, like all companies, care about one thing ... and that is giving the customer what the customer wants

Well....not exactly. They only have to give slightly more of something the customers think they wants than the other guys,.

Top of that list is low fares. After that, in no particular order, the battle fields include, schedules, departure/arrival times, passenger comfort, passenger amenities, style, crew friendliness...and a bunch of other things.

Right now, AC is hoping goat class will lower fares enough to grab more customers...and I suspect it will.

[Edited 2015-08-23 12:51:47]

ytz · Mon Aug 24, 2015 3:51 pm

Quoting whitelight44 (Reply 16):
Someone should really speak out for the well being of passengers onboard planes these days on such tight seats.

Quoting United Airline (Reply 18):
I did HKG-YVR-HKG on AC back in March and it was terrible.

Why'd you choose AC over CX on that route?

Quoting longhauler (Reply 24):

AC is basically going all high density across the entire long-haul fleet. It'll be a great live experiment to see how passengers react. Will they start picking competitors or will there be enough customer complaints a la BA:

http://www.runwaygirlnetwork.com/201...-airways-to-widen-seats-for-787-9/

N1120A · Mon Aug 24, 2015 6:29 pm

Unfortunate that the Berthas are taking a hit in J, but staying the same in Y and W.

GSTBA · Mon Aug 24, 2015 8:18 pm

Quoting briguychau (Thread starter):
28J-24W-398Y (450 setas total, down from 36J-24W-398Y 458 seats)

I see that AC are planning to use this configuration on there LHR-YVR route. They will offer 95 more seats in economy on there 77W compared to BA's A380.

Was wondering does the high density layout feel as cramped as it sounds..

Does any other airline offer such a high density layout on there 77W's

LondonCity · Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:05 pm

Quoting GSTBA (Reply 28):
Does any other airline offer such a high density layout on there 77W's

Some of AF's 77Ws can accommodate 468 passengers ! KLM's 77Ws also have dense seating and now QR will be retrofitting its 77Ws with 10-across Y seating.

http://www.theqatarsource.com/seatmaps/77w/42j316y.html

bioyuki · Tue Aug 25, 2015 12:18 am

Quoting United Airline (Reply 18):
I did HKG-YVR-HKG on AC back in March and it was terrible. Baby seats, the aisle is so narrow that you hit someone easily.

CI has joined the club. Who else will be joining?

I flew CI's new W product SFO-TPE-SFO in July and it was pretty good. All the Y pax looked miserable in that 3-4-3 config though. I guess I'll add AC to the list of airlines I won't fly in Y...

chrisa330 · Tue Aug 25, 2015 12:26 am

Quoting GSTBA (Reply 28):
I see that AC are planning to use this configuration on there LHR-YVR route. They will offer 95 more seats in economy on there 77W compared to BA's A380.

AC has been operating the 777HD on YVR-LHR for sometime now...this isn't anything new for the route.

N1120A · Tue Aug 25, 2015 1:44 am

Quoting GSTBA (Reply 28):
I see that AC are planning to use this configuration on there LHR-YVR route. They will offer 95 more seats in economy on there 77W compared to BA's A380.

The real loss here is that they are actually reducing J by 8, but that doesn't add any seats to the back.

Quoting GSTBA (Reply 28):
Was wondering does the high density layout feel as cramped as it sounds..

It is worse than it sounds. I flew it, albeit in a door exit row, on YVR-YYZ. That absolutely sucked.

Quoting GSTBA (Reply 28):
Does any other airline offer such a high density layout on there 77W's

Well, plenty have 3-4-3. The difference with AC is that they have fairly slimline seats and a substantially smaller premium cabin on the HD birds.

Viscount724 · Thu Aug 27, 2015 1:21 am

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 6):
Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 4):
I can only hope AC will keep W fares at reasonable level.

What do you think a reasonable spread is? For example I think the NZ spread is bordering on extortion.

But the NZ product is closer to what would be J class on many carriers.

Quoting whitelight44 (Reply 16):
This is very sad, seating in a 17 inch wide seat for a 15 hour long flight from Toronto to Hong Kong puts pax well being at risk. Boeing is so stupid to allow them to do 3x4x3. Someone should really speak out for the well being of passengers onboard planes these days on such tight seats.

Why is that any different than the many other carriers operating 10-abreast 777s?

Quoting YTZ (Reply 26):
Quoting whitelight44 (Reply 16):
Someone should really speak out for the well being of passengers onboard planes these days on such tight seats.
Quoting United Airline (Reply 18):
I did HKG-YVR-HKG on AC back in March and it was terrible.

Why'd you choose AC over CX on that route?

Millions of Canadians are AC/Star Alliance frequent flyer members. Oneworld points are less useful in Canada.

New AC 777 Configs Released

New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

RE: New AC 777 Configs Released

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net