Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
keitherson
Topic Author
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2014 3:00 pm

Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 12:01 am

The Boeing 787 used to be 8-across in 2-4-2, and sold that way, but the majority of airlines now do 9-across. That means 17" seat width or less. The only exception is JAL.

Similarly, the Boeing 777-300ER used to be 9-across in 3-3-3 configuration, and now virtually every airline is retrofitting or having new deliveries in "high density" in 3-4-3 fashion. EK, QR, AF, AA are some. Many older configs still exist in the market, though.

For the Airbus A330, economy remains 2-4-2, and very few carriers (though they exist) have moved to 9-across in 3-3-3 configuration: exceptions include Air Asia, Air Transat, WOW Air. But nearly all legacies and flag carriers keep 2-4-2.

For the Airbus A350, it was designed for and remains 3-3-3 with 18" seat width.

For economy passengers, does flying Boeing mean subpar experiences compared to Airbus all around now for seat pitch/width in the newest aircraft?
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2688
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 12:16 am

Well, I've now flown on all of those 4, and I found that really there's not that much in it, even if I did feel a little more squeezed on VN's 789 than CX's A359, not helped by my neighbour's arm position, but if I'd sat upright our shoulders may have been touching, and I'm very slim, so was he. The pitch isn't really aircraft specific, an airline can always choose to put in more or less legroom, but I found that both were perfectly acceptable for a 6'0 guy with a little to spare.

Really I wouldn't say the 777 and 787 are subpar to the extent that you should avoid, if they're the mode of transport for the route you want, just do it unless there are other reasons related to the airline.

All that said, I would choose an A330 for a route if all those 4 were the options because I like the 2 seats by the window, it makes it easier to get out if your face is otherwise permanently pressed against a window. The A350 was not bad though, I did enjoy it.
Last edited by MrHMSH on Sat Sep 24, 2016 12:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
AC853
Posts: 91
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:14 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 2:01 am

I agree that the A330 has a great configuration. However, we really enjoyed our recent AC787-9 flights to and from London. We sat in the middle and found the seats very comfortable for a 9 hour flight.
Last edited by AC853 on Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
817Dreamliiner
Posts: 3569
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:12 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 10:46 am

keitherson wrote:

For the Airbus A350, it was designed for and remains 3-3-3 with 18" seat width.


Keep in mind that this is achieved with 1.5" armrests while the A330, 787 and 777 uses 2" armrests in their configurations (based on ACAPs available online). That same A350 seat can fit in the 787 as well but with 17"-17.5" aisles rather than 18" aisles.
Life is encrypted, you are modified, Like a virus in a lullaby, Artificial till the day you die, silly programme, You're corrupted
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 10:57 am

keitherson wrote:

For the Airbus A350, it was designed for and remains 3-3-3 with 18" seat width.



There is already a 10 abreast A350 in the works despite it being a LCC. How long after EIS was it until the first 10 abreast 777? Not this quick.

I've flown on each of the following configured types on at least 2 different carriers and from best to worst.

1 - 9 abreast 777
2 - 9 abreast A350
3 - 8 abreast A330
4 - 10 abreast 777
5 - 9 abreast 787
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2139
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 10:57 am

I think it depends on the airline and its product and service. My best flight in Economy was on Turkish Airlines (JFK-IST) in 2014 on the 777-300ER. Service and legroom were quite good. Plane was about 3 years old at the time and looked great. Similarly, had a very good experience the year prior on a brand new Virgin Atlantic A330-300 (JFK-LHR-JFK). Have only flown the 787-9 in BusinessFirst on United, but the Economy section on that flight looked tight and ordinary. The overall cabin though on the 787 feels much "higher" in terms of ceiling span than the 777 even if the actual fuselage is not as wide. I think the answer comes down to the airline you fly. Austrian has a very nice 777 cabin with very good service on board, but the 10 across seating is extremely uncomfortable.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3642
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 11:18 am

For the airplanes that you listed I would most prefer the A330. The window aisle pairs are nice. Nothing beats the 7 abreast 767, but that is starting to fade away. 9 and 10 abreast aren't as nice and I don't like the narrower seats, although I think the seat width difference is more of a psychological factor than practically being that noticeable. I once got the opportunity to go into a cabin mockup of the 777 with 9 abreast and 10 abreast seats side by side. If you are in the aisle or window the difference is barely noticeable. Where you do notice the difference is when in a middle seat and if you have to share the armrests. That is where you feel a true difference, but fortunately I have never flown long haul in a middle seat.

With that said, my favorite widebody is the 787 in business class. The nice big windows and awesome cabin is great and the best ride when you get the priveledge to sit up front. It is the only airplane where you can easily see out the window on the opposite side of the plane.
 
User avatar
AirbusA343
Posts: 358
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 8:38 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 11:31 am

From what I hear, the 787 is not very comfortable due to the entertainment boxes under the seats. In contrast, I hear the A350 is really comfortable. Haven't heard remarks about the 777/A330.
 
Armodeen
Posts: 1267
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:17 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 11:56 am

777Jet wrote:

1 - 10 abreast 380
2 - 9 abreast 777
3 - 9 abreast A350
4 - 8 abreast A330
5 - 10 abreast 777
6 - 9 abreast 787


Fixed it for you ;) (yes I know it wasn't on the list, but it really is better than everything else out there for Y pax comfort).
 
raylee67
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 12:29 pm

Haven't done A350 and 787, but have done 777 (both 3-3-3 and 3-4-3 config) and A333 long haul.

Strangely I don't feel much difference between the 3-3-3 and 3-4-3 config of 777. Since I prefer to sit at the Window seat, I prefer 777 over A330. The reason is that if the flight is not full, the chance would be that the middle seat in the 777 would left unfilled. While the 2-4-2 config of A330 would almost guarantee the seat besides the window seat (which is aisle seat) would be filled, unless the plane is really empty. So the chance of getting 1.5 seats on a 777 for me is much higher. And on a long haul flight, getting 0.5 seat more makes all the difference.
319/20/21 332/33 342/43/45 359/51 388 707 717 732/36/3G/38/39 74R/42/43/44/4E/48 757 762/63 772/7L/73/7W 788/89 D10 M80 135/40/45 175/90 DH1/4 CRJ/R7 L10
AY LH OU SR BA FI LX
AA DL UA NW AC CP WS FL NK PD
CI NH SQ KA CX JL BR OZ TG KE CA CZ NZ JQ RS
 
ZincSaucier
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:28 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:35 pm

AirbusA343 wrote:
From what I hear, the 787 is not very comfortable due to the entertainment boxes under the seats. In contrast, I hear the A350 is really comfortable. Haven't heard remarks about the 777/A330.


Really depends on the airline and configuration for that. JL's old layout (no prem econ) had boxes. Wasn't as bad as the TK 340 boxes, but somewhat annoying. In the new configuration, no boxes.
 
User avatar
AirbusA343
Posts: 358
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 8:38 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 4:05 pm

ZincSaucier wrote:
AirbusA343 wrote:
From what I hear, the 787 is not very comfortable due to the entertainment boxes under the seats. In contrast, I hear the A350 is really comfortable. Haven't heard remarks about the 777/A330.


Really depends on the airline and configuration for that. JL's old layout (no prem econ) had boxes. Wasn't as bad as the TK 340 boxes, but somewhat annoying. In the new configuration, no boxes.


Thanks for the correction. I based that comment on people who were on a QR 787/A350 and so thought that perhaps every airline has a box under the seats on their Dreamliners.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14094
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 4:57 pm

I recently took another carrier (Korean) with 9 abreast 777 after I learned the KLM flight was "new" 10 abreast 777. I will take Korean again next flight. Same another time I took 10 abreast EK A380 over the 10 abreast KL 777 having the choice. KL switching to 10 abreast on 777 doesn't help their profitability in my case. That's for sure.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
J343
Posts: 311
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:40 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 6:21 pm

I find that the Y long haul experience on the Boeing 777-300ER varies by airline. I've only really flown with BA and CX on their 777Ws and I find that CX's Y offering on their 777W a much better experience compared to BA's 777W despite having the same configuration (3x3x3). BA's 777W Y is 17 inches wide whereas CX offers 18.5 inches with 32 inch legroom and it makes long haul flights so much more bearable. Also, BA's WTP is just as wide as CX's Y on their 777W.

I have yet to experience Y on the A350 which I'm hoping to be soon with CX from LGW - HKG and I'm really looking forward to it.

If you ask me, I find the 2-4-2 configuration on CX's A330-300 very comfortable as well as their 777Ws. BA's A380 is also comfortable for long haul flights having flown with them from LHR-SFO.

However, nothing still beats flying J on CX (B777W) and BA's (A380) even if it's not the best product offering out there. I'm really looking forward to flying AA's new J on their 777Ws.
 
737max8
Posts: 648
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:13 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 6:31 pm

My experiences...

77W
Virgin Australia - 3x3x3 - fantastic
Cathay Pacific - 3x3x3 - fantastic
American - 3x4x3 - moderate
Emirates - 3x4x3 - very tight

787
Norwegian - 3x3x3 - thought it was fine

A330
Fiji Airways - 2x4x2 - felt very tight for me

So in my experience a 3x3x3 777 still takes the cake over anything not called the A380 or 747
The thoughts and opinions expressed in my comments do not represent that of any airline or affiliate.
Flown on: 717 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 7M8 744 744ER 752 753 762 763 772 773ER 788 789 A220 A319/20/21 A332 A333 A339 A343 A346 A359 A388
 
iadadd
Posts: 302
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2016 10:16 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 6:43 pm

3-4-3 is tight on the 77W, but a window seat is definitely a better experience
 
soyuz
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 9:35 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 10:30 pm

Haven't had the pleasure of flying on the 787 or A350 yet but have flown many sectors (long and medium haul) with A330/A340 (2-4-2) and 777 (3-3-3 with AF, SQ, KE, TG and 3-4-3 with EK). Invariably by the window. Now I'm quite a thin guy but find the 10 abreast 777 very uncomfortable especially on the long DXB-east coast Aust flights. Especially when eating, I find I have to tuck my arms in close to my body to avoid elbowing my neighbour and vice versa. I definitely try to avoid 10 abreast 777s on anything longer than 6-7 hour sectors. OTOH I do all I can to score the 10 abreast A380 (or 747) for obvious reasons.
 
cheeken
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 10:21 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 10:39 pm

Another reason to choose A350 and 787s over the other two is air quality. These two have remarkably better atmospheric conditions in the cabin. I don't get teary eyes or dry lips on them vs the other two!!!
 
User avatar
RL777
Posts: 651
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:43 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 10:46 pm

I would disagree with the notion that Airbus wide bodies offer a better cabin experience. Its all relative to the carriers decisions. A 10 abreast 77W isn't too pleasant, but neither will be a 10 abreast A350. Personally I find the 77W to offer the most spacious cabin (9 abreast config) but I know quite a few people who prefer the A330.
 
iadadd
Posts: 302
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2016 10:16 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sat Sep 24, 2016 11:46 pm

What I've noticed from the EK 77W, which is 3-4-3, is that the aisles feel very tight and make it a little difficult during boarding and deplaning
 
atsiang
Posts: 132
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 8:40 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sun Sep 25, 2016 12:05 am

My 2 cents may not mean much as I have not flown on the A330 or A350 yet. Most of my overseas travel across the Pacific from SFO to either HKG or to SYD has been on either the 777 (to HKG) or 787 (to SYD). Previously UA used 747 to SYD then changed to 777 and now uses 787. While I miss the roominess of the 747, the 787 felt more comfy due to the improved air quality. It felt less dry on the 787. Typically on the 777 to HKG, I'm noticeably dehydrated.
 
User avatar
afterburner
Posts: 1459
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:38 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sun Sep 25, 2016 12:07 am

Last month I flew on a 787 for a first time in Y (it was a -9 operates by LATAM). Although I got a seat with a very generous leg room, I could feel that it was narrower than a seat on an 8-abreast A330 or 9-abreast 777. It was ok for the flight that was only less than 3 hours from AKL to SYD. However it might be uncomfortable for much longer flights.
 
rocketPower
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 9:48 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sun Sep 25, 2016 12:09 am

I see some think the 10Y 777 is better than the 9Y 787, but isn't the seat a little wider on the 787?

In any case I have flown AC 9Y 777 and 10Y and the difference is big enough to be noticed.

It seems like only physics or legislation will keep airlines from making passengers less and less comfortable for their bottom line.
rocketPower

Life is about enjoying being uncomfortable. If you're complacent, something is wrong!
 
User avatar
Clipper101
Posts: 697
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 5:44 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sun Sep 25, 2016 12:12 am

Comparing B777 (3-4-3) to A330 (2-4-2) I prefer B777 in window seat location, cabin wall (thus, fuselage curvature) is steeper in A330 & just cuts into my shoulder, in an A330 I feel like I have to bend my back to look out of the window. I find B777 floor level situated to make window seats more comfortable at shoulder level, I do not bend my back too much to look out. I like window seats to support my shoulder & head on the wall while sleeping on long haul, I can do it better in a B777. Other inner Y seat locations, A330 equal or little more comfortable than B777.
 
HoustonRaylon
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2016 12:14 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sun Sep 25, 2016 12:30 am

>15yrs lurker here. But his topic made me break the duck and write.

Used to fly a lot with KLM...until I have flown once a 777-300ER in a 3-4-3 configuration. I am 6.0/185 and 88kg/195lbs, so no giant but a little bigger than the average person.
I like to have a window seat, because u get some extra space between the armrest and the wall compared to an isle or middle seat. NOT SO when they cramm 3-4-3. Because the armerest is now flush with the wall u need to follow the wall curvature in order to fit in there. Try this for 12hrs. So, you sit upright but you have to tilt your upper torso and your head inwards, following the wall.

NEVER flew KLM again.
And will never fly with any carrier that crams as many seats in a row as possible. They are maybe ok for the Asia/Middle east/India but not for fully grown male caucasians.
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 7094
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sun Sep 25, 2016 1:25 am

817Dreamliiner wrote:
Keep in mind that this is achieved with 1.5" armrests while the A330, 787 and 777 uses 2" armrests in their configurations (based on ACAPs available online). That same A350 seat can fit in the 787 as well but with 17"-17.5" aisles rather than 18" aisles.

The hard numbers are that the A350 cabin is 12 cm (4.8") wider than the 787 cabin. 561 vs 549 cm. So you will have to make both aisles 2.4" narrower on the 787 to produce identical shoulder room at 3x3x3 seating.

The difference isn't that much, but noticeable when seated between two "gorillas". I think Airbus should quietly retire the XWB part of the A350 name. It was relevant ten years ago to tell that the A350XWB was one seat wider than the A350 Mk.1 (aka A330NEO). Or *almost* one seat wider, 43 cm (17") to be exact. Airbus said themselves that less than 18" is a violation of ordinary human rights.

Whether armrests are 1.5" or 2" or whatever, that totally depends on what seat type the airline chooses to put on their plane.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
downdata
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:38 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sun Sep 25, 2016 1:42 am

Only the A330 with 2-4-2 is bearable on a 10+ hr flight, window or side aisle seat. That and the old 2-5-2 772 was fine too for the same reason, window or side aisle seat.
 
User avatar
817Dreamliiner
Posts: 3569
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:12 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sun Sep 25, 2016 5:46 am

prebennorholm wrote:
So you will have to make both aisles 2.4" narrower on the 787 to produce identical shoulder room at 3x3x3 seating.

Well, I only took 2" off the aisles, but the thinner armrests gives you back an inch making the aisles 17" to meet the minimum aisle width. Anyways, I was only pointing out that you can fit the seats in the 787 if you wanted to.

prebennorholm wrote:
Whether armrests are 1.5" or 2" or whatever, that totally depends on what seat type the airline chooses to put on their plane.

True.
Life is encrypted, you are modified, Like a virus in a lullaby, Artificial till the day you die, silly programme, You're corrupted
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14094
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sun Sep 25, 2016 12:30 pm

I like that many A330/340s have double armrests for the middle seats.

Image

What I find most remarkable about this picture though is a person (probably the Italian lawyer on a previous flight) that paid a little extra for a front seat. Left window .

:shock:
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
sassiciai
Posts: 1121
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:26 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sun Sep 25, 2016 1:19 pm

That double (fixed) armrest has ruined many a person's long haul sleep! Imagine the pleasure when "boarding completed" is sounded to find that you have a row of 4 seats to yourself. Only to then find that the middle armrests are fixed! OMG! The middle 4 are in fact 2 sets of 2 seats, just like the 2 seat units at the windows

Apart from that, I much prefer the A330 experience to the 10-across 777 (and its omni-present roar from the engines). Best is the A380, I have been in BA and SQ so far, and would love for it to become more popular!

Yet to set foot on a 787 or A350. But from what I read about 9-across 787, I'll try hard to avoid that experience, despite the claimed air quality improvement!
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 863
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sun Sep 25, 2016 5:18 pm

And nobody mentioned the cesspool of the lot.......the 9 abreast A330.
 
User avatar
777GE90
Posts: 132
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 5:26 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sun Sep 25, 2016 5:23 pm

I've flown three of them long haul (777, 787 and 330) and I must being fairly skinny what bothers me more than anything is how full the plane is compared to other things such as the annoying IFE box on the 330 or the narrow seat pitch on the 787. I much prefer a emptyish 787 long-haul flight compared to packed full 380 for example.
Image
 
parisien
Posts: 844
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 5:04 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Sun Sep 25, 2016 5:46 pm

Recently flow on ANA 787-8 from Paris to Haneda. Was a bit hesitant at first after reading about 9 abreast Y class comments on the 787s here. BUT, I had a very nice flight and the seat I found was very comfortable (I had an aisle seat on the window rows...and could peek out across the two people next to me thanks to the big windows). So I guess it really depends a lot on the airlines (no big entertainment box under the seat that I remember). I arrived HND fresher than usual (maybe psychological after reading how the 787s will make you less tired etc.).
On ANA, I loved the airplane and the interior (seats), the food, the crew/service...not so much the content of the entertainment system. B787s are now my favorite (at least with ANA). Will definitely try to avoid AirAsia X A330 (nine abreast and tight leg room for a thin person, 180 cm tall) in the future.
As for 777s : Did not think it was so narrow, except for the width of the aisles, when flying 10 abreast 777s of EK, though noticably more comfortable on the 9 abreast 777s of SQ.
 
User avatar
LH748
Posts: 459
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:44 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Mon Sep 26, 2016 12:41 am

I recently had my first two 787 flights with MF (that's Xiamen Airlines) and I was quite positively surprised. I expected it to be pretty cramped but it was actually one of the more comfortable flights, also because the seats were quite comfortable. My routing was AMS-XMN and back so I had plenty of time to test those seats. On the way to China, I was sitting at the window with two strangers next to me. Usually I don't like to take a window seat for a longer flight if I don't fly with someone I know but I really wanted the window seat for my first 787 flight and we departed at noon so there was something to see outside :D
On the flight back I opted for an aisle seat just to have the chance to get up whenever I want and not having to climb over sleeping neighbors.

330/340: With a 2-4-2 configuration it's definitely a good pick for a longhaul but I also had a negative experience with a LX A340. The seats were very uncomfortable and I felt cramped.

777: I experienced TK's 3-3-3, AC's 3-3-3, UA's 3-3-3, DL's 3-3-3 and AA's 3-4-3. I had very mixed feelings about the 3-4-3 before but on the AA flight it felt ok. Definitely worse than TK though.

Bottom line: I think the seat design (and the position of the IFE box) is as important as the seating configuration. Of course, one more seat in each row reduces the available space but slimmer seat models and better upholstering can also increase the seating comfort. Also, keep in mind thant the aisles are becoming narrower to make some more room for the seats. It's a little nightmare for flight attendants, which have to maneuver the catering trolleys through the aircraft, and I noticed that they bump more often into seats than they used to.
306 310 318 319 320 321 333 343 388 ATR72 733 737 738 739 743 744 748 752 753 763 764 772 77W 788 CRJ7 CRJ9 E170 F100 MD11 RJ1H
AA AB AC AF AK AZ BA DE DL EW FD FR HF HG IB IR MF KU LH LT LX OD TG TK TP UA VJ VN WN W6 YP YW
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14094
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Mon Sep 26, 2016 8:15 am

jeffrey0032j wrote:
And nobody mentioned the cesspool of the lot.......the 9 abreast A330.


I think the 9 abreast A330/A340 are rare. Never been on one, or spoken to anyone who has. It must be real crampy just like the odd 8 abreast 767s and airlines doing 28 inch pitch..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
oldannyboy
Posts: 2579
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:28 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Mon Sep 26, 2016 10:56 am

Small, thin, short guy here...so there you go. Shoulder space is thus not so important for me, so 9 vs 10 abreast thing not one of my priorities I admit.. being short has its advantages I guess.... (I have also flown 9-abreast A330s, 8-abreast 767s and even 10-abreast DC-10s!). I have noticed that regardless of the number of seats per row, the comfort factor very much depends on the airline (type of seat, quality of entertainment, quality of on-board service and experience, friendliness of the crew, etc..), however to me the deciding factors for a "comfortable" flight are the quietness of the cabin and legroom.
As much as I love the looks of a B777 I invariably find them far too noisy on long flights, especially at the back. I confess I am a big A330 fan.. I also used to love KLM MD-11s....
 
keitherson
Topic Author
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2014 3:00 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Tue Sep 27, 2016 8:21 am

777Jet wrote:
keitherson wrote:

For the Airbus A350, it was designed for and remains 3-3-3 with 18" seat width.



There is already a 10 abreast A350 in the works despite it being a LCC. How long after EIS was it until the first 10 abreast 777? Not this quick.

I've flown on each of the following configured types on at least 2 different carriers and from best to worst.

1 - 9 abreast 777
2 - 9 abreast A350
3 - 8 abreast A330
4 - 10 abreast 777
5 - 9 abreast 787


With #1 going away quickly, it's only a matter of time until people realize the better comfort of the Airbus planes perhaps. But like many others have noted, seat design is just as important.
 
LLA001
Posts: 218
Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 7:36 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Tue Sep 27, 2016 10:28 am

I am a person who goes to toilet a lot ( 3-4 times during long haul) and with 2+4+2 seating I have a chance to sit at an aisle and not be too far from the window plus there is only one person instead of two that will go to through me. So if I have a chance I try to choose A330/340 for my long hauls even if there is a 77W as an alternative.

I am 6'2" ( 190cm) so for me length between the seats is very important rather than the width, in this catergory I think all airliners fail no matter what configuraion as they get tighter and tighter. I don't mind if my shoulder is touching someone else but my knees kill me in those long flights. I think 1980s economy seats feel like premium products of today.

Also an homage to 2+5+2 777, it sucked to be the middle guy total nightmare but on empty flights you had a whole bed to yourself in the middle but I guess everyone will agree 3+3+3 is a much better option for everyone.
 
RohanDXB
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 8:26 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:14 am

Even though the 3-3-3 config 777 is obviously preferable to the 3-4-3, for me there is another layer of differentiation.
I would rather fly a 77L rather than a 77W in 3-4-3. The lower capacity of the 77L makes it feels less crowded & sardine-y.

As someone who is wider than tall, seat width is more valuable than pitch but sadly even those airlines that are 'spacious' are usually because of width which is not much use to me.

The 3-3-3 787 is the worst. Especially with the entertainment boxes below the seat in front (at least that is the case on QR).

QR's A330 has the same issue with IFE boxes but being in the 2 section (2-4-2) is still quite pleasant. Haven't tried the 350 yet.
The A380 is undoubtedly the best option if you must be in a 3-4-3 flight of any significant length.

Interestingly enough, in NB AC, I have had great flights on the 321 and the 320 is ok. The 737 is the worst (specially with FZs awful seats that don't have a seatback pocket - your knees ram into the plastic and it's miserable.

Ro
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 2416
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:39 am

jeffrey0032j wrote:
And nobody mentioned the cesspool of the lot.......the 9 abreast A330.

right up there with the 8 abreast charter config 767. TCX have just converted all their 9 abreast A330 fleet back to 2-4-2

In some aircraft adding that extra seat turns it from a comfortable ride into a torture chamber. I would hate to travel more than a couple of hours at most in an A330 with 3-3-3
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:09 pm

Armodeen wrote:
777Jet wrote:

1 - 10 abreast 380
2 - 9 abreast 777
3 - 9 abreast A350
4 - 8 abreast A330
5 - 10 abreast 777
6 - 9 abreast 787


Fixed it for you ;) (yes I know it wasn't on the list, but it really is better than everything else out there for Y pax comfort).


You're right, the 10 abreast A380 is more comfortable than the 9 abreast 777, but since it wasn't being discussed ;)

Now... Two days ago I flew on the CX 359 and I was in a middle seat and the guy on my right, in the aisle seat, was an XWB himself. I was twisted to the left for most of the flight and my back, shoulders, neck and right arm are still in pain. So, my conclusion is simple - your seat neighbor has the potential to influence your flight comfort factor much more than the config. This guy took 20% of my seat space by spilling over the armrest. I had my elbow into him to the point he was continuously grunting (he didn't even try to lean away so screw him). This was my worst flight ever in terms of comfort and it was a shame that my first CX A350-900XWB experience had to be wrecked by somebody who was an XWB and who should have had either 2 Y seats or flown in a class with bigger seats. I would have rather flown in a 9 abreast 787 next to a normal sized person than fly next to this guy in the A350 or even the 9 abreast 777 or 10 abreast A380 at that...

Also, for those commenting on the width of the arm rests - on the CX A350 they were about 1.5 inches wide. That's all.

Image20160925_204007 by Triple Seven Jet, on Flickr

Image20160925_174949 by Triple Seven Jet, on Flickr
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:30 pm

Regarding the 787-9 British Airways.
They announced that they were installing wider seats in the new aircraft after complaints and later retrofitting the -8's.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/trave ... -inch.html

Question. Has anybody sampled the new seats?
 
rocketPower
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 9:48 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Wed Sep 28, 2016 6:11 am

parapente wrote:
Regarding the 787-9 British Airways.
They announced that they were installing wider seats in the new aircraft after complaints and later retrofitting the -8's.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/trave ... -inch.html

Question. Has anybody sampled the new seats?


The new seats are actually the usual 17.3" seats used in most 9y 787s. Not sure why they had 16.8" before. I tried the 17" on AC 777 and that was brutal enough.
rocketPower

Life is about enjoying being uncomfortable. If you're complacent, something is wrong!
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Wed Sep 28, 2016 12:32 pm

Thank you Rocketpower.
What an extraordinary decision to fit 16.8in seats (I guess they were worried about aisle width).But these planes are replacing 772er's that I have flown countless times.In the BA 9X arrangement these seats are 18 (poss 18plus) of course their loyal (air miles) consumers were going to notice such an abrupt change.But well done senior management for making a fast turnaround decision on this.
17.3 is what I call the standard Boeing seat (707,727,737,747,757,767) so there should be no real complaints there.
 
Planetalk
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:12 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Wed Sep 28, 2016 1:50 pm

rocketPower wrote:
parapente wrote:
Regarding the 787-9 British Airways.
They announced that they were installing wider seats in the new aircraft after complaints and later retrofitting the -8's.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/trave ... -inch.html

Question. Has anybody sampled the new seats?


The new seats are actually the usual 17.3" seats used in most 9y 787s. Not sure why they had 16.8" before. I tried the 17" on AC 777 and that was brutal enough.


Indeed, there's been a lot of misinformation about this, the assumption seemed to be that this was taking BA seats up to 17.5" + so it would be close to the airbuses. Which is not true and would have begged the obviously questions why everyone hadn't done it.

No idea why they installed such small seats to start with,but QR did the same, theirs are 16.9". Frankly below 17" should be the realm of chárter carriers.

Pefsonally I stick to A330/A340 whereverpossible. Decent seat width, great configuration, nice and quiet. The A350 or B777 in 9 abreast being next best, but the noise of the triple I find fairly unbearable. Cant wait for my next A340 flight in december, after the A380, best plane in the sky from a pax perspective IMHO.

I'm a normal sized guy (1.79m, 72kgs) and width does make a difference, most crucially at shoulder level. The 787/777 10 abreast seats seem to be just below the tipping point between rubbing shoulders and not doing so quite often. Which is why what appears a smal difference can make a big difference, if it's at a 'critical point'.
 
richardw
Posts: 3168
Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 3:17 am

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Wed Sep 28, 2016 1:53 pm

B787-10 - isn't this the perfect aircraft for more choice in economy seating? Passengers would chooses seats according to their needs and the airline would get additional revenues from seat choice payment streams.

From the back you'd have standard 3-3-3, then some 3-3-3 rows with extra legroom.
Next you'd have standard 2-4-2 seating with slightly wider armrests and perhaps 2 armrests in the middle 2-2|2-2, then some rows with extra legroom.
next you'd have 2-3-2 premium economy and then business, possibly first.
 
ahmetdouas
Posts: 310
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 2:23 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Wed Sep 28, 2016 2:09 pm

Planetalk wrote:
rocketPower wrote:
parapente wrote:
Regarding the 787-9 British Airways.
They announced that they were installing wider seats in the new aircraft after complaints and later retrofitting the -8's.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/trave ... -inch.html

Question. Has anybody sampled the new seats?


The new seats are actually the usual 17.3" seats used in most 9y 787s. Not sure why they had 16.8" before. I tried the 17" on AC 777 and that was brutal enough.


Indeed, there's been a lot of misinformation about this, the assumption seemed to be that this was taking BA seats up to 17.5" + so it would be close to the airbuses. Which is not true and would have begged the obviously questions why everyone hadn't done it.

No idea why they installed such small seats to start with,but QR did the same, theirs are 16.9". Frankly below 17" should be the realm of chárter carriers.

Pefsonally I stick to A330/A340 whereverpossible. Decent seat width, great configuration, nice and quiet. The A350 or B777 in 9 abreast being next best, but the noise of the triple I find fairly unbearable. Cant wait for my next A340 flight in december, after the A380, best plane in the sky from a pax perspective IMHO.

I'm a normal sized guy (1.79m, 72kgs) and width does make a difference, most crucially at shoulder level. The 787/777 10 abreast seats seem to be just below the tipping point between rubbing shoulders and not doing so quite often. Which is why what appears a smal difference can make a big difference, if it's at a 'critical point'.


I flew the BA A380 upper deck Y and found it nothing too special except being admittedly very quiet. Seat pitch awful!
I remember a better experience on a TK 3-3-3 77W
I am trying out NZ 77W 3-4-3 Y but with more pitch! Let's see how it goes.
 
Planetalk
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:12 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Wed Sep 28, 2016 2:48 pm

ahmetdouas wrote:
Planetalk wrote:
rocketPower wrote:

The new seats are actually the usual 17.3" seats used in most 9y 787s. Not sure why they had 16.8" before. I tried the 17" on AC 777 and that was brutal enough.


Indeed, there's been a lot of misinformation about this, the assumption seemed to be that this was taking BA seats up to 17.5" + so it would be close to the airbuses. Which is not true and would have begged the obviously questions why everyone hadn't done it.

No idea why they installed such small seats to start with,but QR did the same, theirs are 16.9". Frankly below 17" should be the realm of chárter carriers.

Pefsonally I stick to A330/A340 whereverpossible. Decent seat width, great configuration, nice and quiet. The A350 or B777 in 9 abreast being next best, but the noise of the triple I find fairly unbearable. Cant wait for my next A340 flight in december, after the A380, best plane in the sky from a pax perspective IMHO.

I'm a normal sized guy (1.79m, 72kgs) and width does make a difference, most crucially at shoulder level. The 787/777 10 abreast seats seem to be just below the tipping point between rubbing shoulders and not doing so quite often. Which is why what appears a smal difference can make a big difference, if it's at a 'critical point'.


I flew the BA A380 upper deck Y and found it nothing too special except being admittedly very quiet. Seat pitch awful!
I remember a better experience on a TK 3-3-3 77W
I am trying out NZ 77W 3-4-3 Y but with more pitch! Let's see how it goes.


I'm not too surprised, BA are fairly ropey across the board these days. They actually use the same economy seat across their fleet (except 787) even if a wider one would fit. So for example you get the same seat on A380 as on B747. this is because they want to maintain a clear differential to premium economy, which would be reduced by more comfortable Y. Fairly shoddy in my view. They do as you say also have awful pitch.

The TK 777 will has seats appropriate to the plane so they wil be more comfortable that the BA 380. The 777 in 9 abreast is a very comfortable plane, just the noise gets to me a bit.

Obviously my comparison requires other things being equal, but in general airlines tend to keep the same pitch bewteen different aircraft types, but will vary the seat width. So on the same airline an A330 will be more comfortable than a B787 or B777 10 across - QR are perhaps the best and most extreme example as their 787s have less pitch as well compared to other types!

Enjoy your flight - I did the NZ 777 last December from Auckland to Buenos Aires. I was a bit nervous, but the gods smiled on me that day and I got 3 seats by the window to myself, so made my myself a bed and had one of my best flights ever! I'd imagine it wouldn't be much fun it it's full, so try and pick a seat strategically. The service is great though, really good food, great ice cream, sparkling wine in economy(!) that can be ordered form your seat back, hope you have a good trip.
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Wed Sep 28, 2016 3:59 pm

BA? Yup not much cop these days.Silly, just putting the same seats (17.3) everywhere when it's not necessary - but of course much cheaper for them.But I do hope they put in standard 18in seats in their new A350's when they come.These are long haul aircraft.

Of course recently there has been the Airbus talk of reducing the width of a standard A380 seat (18.5) to 18 and squeezing in another seat. If I was Emirates I would do exactly the opposite! Use that unused area by the outer wall to ADD another half inch to the seats at X10.God a Y seat at 19 ins!There would be a queue right round the block - and you haven't lost a seat.
But that's called consumer marketing (USP's) and BA don't know how to spell that word these days.
 
caverunner17
Posts: 267
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:50 pm

Re: Long-haul Y pax experience: Boeing 77Ws and 787s vs Airbus 350s and 330s.

Wed Sep 28, 2016 4:31 pm

People are way too caught up in the seat width argument. Frankly, one of my most uncomfortable flights in Y was on AirBerlin's A330. 8-across, but either the padding or the way the seat was shaped hit my back and made it super uncomfortable. I'd take a 9-abreast 787 any day if there was more padding.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos