rbrunner
Topic Author
Posts: 661
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:13 am

A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 4:57 pm

Hi everybody.
TAP have been flying LIS-GRU-LIS nearly daily with the the A330neo since December 15th. Just wonder if someone amongst us a.nutters has been on one of those flights. If so, is the cabin really super quiet? What about the flex cabin? Super passenger experience?
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 11454
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 5:01 pm

rbrunner wrote:
Super passenger experience?

99% of a "passenger experience" is going to depend on the airline, its soft service, and its chosen configuration...

...most of that has nothing to do with an airframe; especially a long-extant one whose modifications are mostly outside of the pax cabin.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
workhorse
Posts: 535
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 5:16 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
rbrunner wrote:
Super passenger experience?

99% of a "passenger experience" is going to depend on the airline, its soft service, and its chosen configuration...

...most of that has nothing to do with an airframe; especially a long-extant one whose modifications are mostly outside of the pax cabin.


Well, the airplane certainly DOES contribute a lot to the passenger experience, as much as the airline.

Without flogging the horse of 787 seat width and windows, I can say, for example, that, as much as the A350 is a great technological achievment, after some flights on it (that i enjoyed very much) I can say that I still prefer the A330/A340. Primarily because of the 2-4-2 layout (and THAT does not depend on the airline, no airline has 2-4-2 in A350), but also, while the A350 is incredibly silent in cabin (even on takeoff), I must say that I actually like the 330's noise, I find it soothing for the ears and nerves.

Then again, call me a nerd, but from the "acoustic" point of view, my favorite ride is the 747-400 (any engines) in the rear cabin. This metallic rumble just makes me happy, no matter what the other circumstances are. Because of this noise, I have always felt good on a 747, even when flying (...gasp...) United :blush:

I wonder how the 330neo sounds, is it more like the350 or the 330 classic...
 
hammer
Posts: 641
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 9:02 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 5:39 pm

Without flogging the horse of 787 seat width and windows, I can say, for example, that, as much as the A350 is a great technological achievment, after some flights on it (that i enjoyed very much) I can say that I still prefer the A330/A340. Primarily because of the 2-4-2 layout (and THAT does not depend on the airline, no airline has 2-4-2 in A350), but also, while the A350 is incredibly silent in cabin (even on takeoff), I must say that I actually like the 330's noise, I find it soothing for the ears and nerves.

DL offers 2-4-2 in the Premium Economy on their A350s
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 11454
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 5:46 pm

workhorse wrote:
no airline has 2-4-2 in A350

That's not true. Delta for example offers it, to anyone who's willing to ....*gasp*.... PAY for it (horrors!)

Second, that's still an airline's choice, as the A330 frame can be operated at 3x3x3 if the airline wants, and several of them have chosen just that.

I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
workhorse
Posts: 535
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:00 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
workhorse wrote:
no airline has 2-4-2 in A350

That's not true. Delta for example offers it, to anyone who's willing to ....*gasp*.... PAY for it (horrors!)


Yeah, right. And on the 330 (including Delta's) I can have it FOR NO ADDITIONAL CHARGE (hallelujah!).

...see my point? No? OK: this is how the airplane (in this case, the 330) positively contributes to passenger experience (within the same airline).
 
ewt340
Posts: 379
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:07 pm

The same as the widely used A330ceo flying around the world today.
And I have to say, since Alongside B767, A330 and A340 are probably the most comfortable for economy class passengers with their 2-3-2 and 2-4-2 configs on most airlines.

Prefer that over A350 or the dreaded B787 and 10-abreast B777. And I'm not buying that b*llsh*t about how the configs ALWAYS comes down to the airlines. Unless you're flying for LCC, A330 would be the best choice, especially since B767 is already on the way out for most operators.
 
User avatar
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1801
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:08 pm

LAX772LR wrote:

Second, that's still an airline's choice, as the A330 frame can be operated at 3x3x3 if the airline wants, and several of them have chosen just that.



The inconvenient truth is that uncomfortable 9-abreast A330s are in vast minority, while all 787 have just that, an uncomfortable 9-abreast seating (with exception for JAL).
Tarriffs are taxes. Taxation is theft. You are not entitled to anything.
If it's a Boeing, I'm not going.
 
User avatar
FlightLevel360
Posts: 345
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:26 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:12 pm

In terms of interior design, Airbus really did not go down the creative path, as opposed to Boeing's Sky Interior. Airspace by Airbus is not standard for all A330Ns, so price sensitive airlines are probably not going to implement the whole thing, which would degrade the passenger experience than originally anticipated by the airline.
It's not the A220. It's the Bombardier CSeries. Period.
Long live the A380 and 747!
 
workhorse
Posts: 535
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:21 pm

ewt340 wrote:
The same as the widely used A330ceo flying around the world today.
And I have to say, since Alongside B767, A330 and A340 are probably the most comfortable for economy class passengers with their 2-3-2 and 2-4-2 configs on most airlines.

Prefer that over A350 or the dreaded B787 and 10-abreast B777. And I'm not buying that b*llsh*t about how the configs ALWAYS comes down to the airlines. Unless you're flying for LCC, A330 would be the best choice, especially since B767 is already on the way out for most operators.


Ditto that.

In my world, it goes as follows:

No.1: 380 upper deck (only because of these cool bins on the sides where you can put your things and that you can lean on, otherwise, it would be the 767)

No.2: 767

No.3: 330/340/310/AB3

No.4: 9-abreast 777, 747, 350, 380 lower deck, ILW/IL9 (yes, I have flown on this!), M11/D10 etc

No.5: 10-abreast 777

No.6: 787 (because of the bloody windows)

Vade retro Satanas: 9-abreast 330, 10-abreast 350
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 11454
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:35 pm

workhorse wrote:
see my point? No?

Indeed-- no. Again, that's something the airline chose. It could increase density in that main cabin configuration tomorrow, if it wanted.

Sincerely doubt that they ever would, but the point at hand is: could.


BlueSky1976 wrote:
The inconvenient truth is that uncomfortable 9-abreast A330s are in vast minority

That a minority of them chose it, doesn't change the fact that it's an option for them to choose.
Which goes right to the point at hand; nothing "inconvenient" about that.




BlueSky1976 wrote:
while all 787 have just that, an uncomfortable 9-abreast seating (with exception for JAL).

"All have it, except the ones that don't"

...makes sense. :)
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Strato2
Posts: 333
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:41 pm

workhorse wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
The same as the widely used A330ceo flying around the world today.
And I have to say, since Alongside B767, A330 and A340 are probably the most comfortable for economy class passengers with their 2-3-2 and 2-4-2 configs on most airlines.

Prefer that over A350 or the dreaded B787 and 10-abreast B777. And I'm not buying that b*llsh*t about how the configs ALWAYS comes down to the airlines. Unless you're flying for LCC, A330 would be the best choice, especially since B767 is already on the way out for most operators.


Ditto that.

In my world, it goes as follows:

No.1: 380 upper deck (only because of these cool bins on the sides where you can put your things and that you can lean on, otherwise, it would be the 767)

No.2: 767

No.3: 330/340/310/AB3

No.4: 9-abreast 777, 747, 350, 380 lower deck, ILW/IL9 (yes, I have flown on this!), M11/D10 etc

No.5: 10-abreast 777

No.6: 787 (because of the bloody windows)

Vade retro Satanas: 9-abreast 330, 10-abreast 350


Excellent ranking although despite the windows I would swap 10-ab 777 with 787 due to latter being more quiet and generally more modern. To say that these things are up to airline is intellectually dishonest as the available cabin width will steer the choice so strongly.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 3414
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:50 pm

Strato2 wrote:
Excellent ranking although despite the windows I would swap 10-ab 777 with 787 due to latter being more quiet and generally more modern. To say that these things are up to airline is intellectually dishonest as the available cabin width will steer the choice so strongly.

:checkmark: 9 abreast on a 787 is tight but bearable. 10 abreast on a 777 is bloody awful. I hate to think how bad 10 abreast would be on an A350. :crowded:

2-4-2 is wonderful, whether on the upper deck of an A380 or on an A330/A340. I'm sure the passenger experience on the A330neo is fantastic.
Most recently flown: A318 F-GUGQ A319 F-GRHR A320ceo D-AIZH A320neo D-AINE A330-300 VH-QPD A350-900 B-LRA A380-800 D-AIMH 717 VH-YQW 737-600 LN-RPA 737-700 OY-JTY 737-800 LN-NGA 767-300 ZK-NCI 777-200 ZK-OKA 777-300 ZK-OKN 787-9 ZK-NZK CS100 HB-JBG
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 6255
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:51 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
rbrunner wrote:
Super passenger experience?

99% of a "passenger experience" is going to depend on the airline, its soft service, and its chosen configuration...

...most of that has nothing to do with an airframe; especially a long-extant one whose modifications are mostly outside of the pax cabin.

So passengers have the same experience in a Shorts 330 as they do in an A380?
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
ewt340
Posts: 379
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:58 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
workhorse wrote:
no airline has 2-4-2 in A350

That's not true. Delta for example offers it, to anyone who's willing to ....*gasp*.... PAY for it (horrors!)


They even offer seats in 1-2-1 configuration if you buy business class ticket! WOW! That's a steal bassically!
 
LXA340
Posts: 1144
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 11:55 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 7:01 pm

Is the air quality better compared to the older A330's / more humid as on A350?
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 11454
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 7:03 pm

ewt340 wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Delta for example offers it, to anyone who's willing to ....*gasp*.... PAY for it

They even offer seats in 1-2-1 configuration if you buy business class ticket!

Oh I know, in them quite often. :razz:



TWA772LR wrote:
So passengers have the same experience in a Shorts 330 as they do in an A380?

I'm going to presume you're actually serious with this question, and give you the answer:
Depends on whose A380 and in what configuration.

Remember, there was a time just two years ago when UU had A380s on order with a planned configuration of 3x5x3 and minimal lavs. I'm going to go out on (not much of a) limb and suggest that any configuration on any other commercial aircraft would've been better than that.

Similarly, going to say that the Residences of EY is a "better experience" (whatever that's supposed to indicate) of any configuration on any other commercial aircraft as well.

In summation.... or more accurately, in review of what was already written: it depends on the airline's chosen configuration, more so than the aircraft itself.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 2898
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 7:13 pm

The A330neo is essentially a less noisy A330ceo. The rest of the manufacturer-specific differences are minor from a passenger perspective.

In my future rankings it should be a solid experience, but nothing special. There's nothing there to vault it over a A350/787, and the 747/767/77 will be the usual challenge to beat.
 
ewt340
Posts: 379
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 7:16 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Delta for example offers it, to anyone who's willing to ....*gasp*.... PAY for it

They even offer seats in 1-2-1 configuration if you buy business class ticket!

Oh I know, in them quite often. :razz:



TWA772LR wrote:
So passengers have the same experience in a Shorts 330 as they do in an A380?

I'm going to presume you're actually serious with this question, and give you the answer:
Depends on whose A380 and in what configuration.

Remember, there was a time just two years ago when UU had A380s on order with a planned configuration of 3x5x3 and minimal lavs. I'm going to go out on (not much of a) limb and suggest that any configuration on any other commercial aircraft would've been better than that.

Similarly, going to say that the Residences of EY is a "better experience" (whatever that's supposed to indicate) of any configuration on any other commercial aircraft as well.

In summation.... or more accurately, in review of what was already written: it depends on the airline's chosen configuration, more so than the aircraft itself.


Yeah no, we got to judge the situation based on actual fact though. No A380 have 3x5x3 configs to this day, they might in the future, but unless that's happen it's a no.

10-abreast B777 on the other hand, became the norm these days. Same goes for 10-abreast A350 on LCC or 9-abreast on A330.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 6255
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Dec 22, 2018 7:19 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Delta for example offers it, to anyone who's willing to ....*gasp*.... PAY for it

They even offer seats in 1-2-1 configuration if you buy business class ticket!

Oh I know, in them quite often. :razz:



TWA772LR wrote:
So passengers have the same experience in a Shorts 330 as they do in an A380?

I'm going to presume you're actually serious with this question, and give you the answer:
Depends on whose A380 and in what configuration.

Remember, there was a time just two years ago when UU had A380s on order with a planned configuration of 3x5x3 and minimal lavs. I'm going to go out on (not much of a) limb and suggest that any configuration on any other commercial aircraft would've been better than that.

Similarly, going to say that the Residences of EY is a "better experience" (whatever that's supposed to indicate) of any configuration on any other commercial aircraft as well.

In summation.... or more accurately, in review of what was already written: it depends on the airline's chosen configuration, more so than the aircraft itself.

So if United ordered F15E's, id get Polaris turn-down and ice cream sundae service? Sweet!
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
Apiculteur
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 4:11 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sun Dec 23, 2018 10:20 am

Has anyone attempted to answer the original question? TAP? 330neo LIS-GRU-LIS? Pax experience?
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9732
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sun Dec 23, 2018 10:41 am

Apiculteur wrote:
Has anyone attempted to answer the original question? TAP? 330neo LIS-GRU-LIS? Pax experience?


Yup

MSPNWA wrote:
The A330neo is essentially a less noisy A330ceo. The rest of the manufacturer-specific differences are minor from a passenger perspective.


And that is about it.

I hope they sell more, I prefer the A330/A340 over anything else flying, sans perhaps the A380 I didn't manage to be on yet.

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
B1168
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Mon Dec 24, 2018 2:24 pm

workhorse wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
The same as the widely used A330ceo flying around the world today.
And I have to say, since Alongside B767, A330 and A340 are probably the most comfortable for economy class passengers with their 2-3-2 and 2-4-2 configs on most airlines.

Prefer that over A350 or the dreaded B787 and 10-abreast B777. And I'm not buying that b*llsh*t about how the configs ALWAYS comes down to the airlines. Unless you're flying for LCC, A330 would be the best choice, especially since B767 is already on the way out for most operators.


Ditto that.

In my world, it goes as follows:

No.1: 380 upper deck (only because of these cool bins on the sides where you can put your things and that you can lean on, otherwise, it would be the 767)

No.2: 767

No.3: 330/340/310/AB3

No.4: 9-abreast 777, 747, 350, 380 lower deck, ILW/IL9 (yes, I have flown on this!), M11/D10 etc

No.5: 10-abreast 777

No.6: 787 (because of the bloody windows)

Vade retro Satanas: 9-abreast 330, 10-abreast 350


Let’s pray no lower deck of A380 get a 3-5-3 configuration?
BTW I begin to fear airlines load 7-abreast in the 3.96-meter-wide (for Americans, 13 feet) C919.
Last edited by B1168 on Mon Dec 24, 2018 2:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
B1168
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Mon Dec 24, 2018 2:33 pm

ewt340 wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
They even offer seats in 1-2-1 configuration if you buy business class ticket!

Oh I know, in them quite often. :razz:



TWA772LR wrote:
So passengers have the same experience in a Shorts 330 as they do in an A380?

I'm going to presume you're actually serious with this question, and give you the answer:
Depends on whose A380 and in what configuration.

Remember, there was a time just two years ago when UU had A380s on order with a planned configuration of 3x5x3 and minimal lavs. I'm going to go out on (not much of a) limb and suggest that any configuration on any other commercial aircraft would've been better than that.

Similarly, going to say that the Residences of EY is a "better experience" (whatever that's supposed to indicate) of any configuration on any other commercial aircraft as well.

In summation.... or more accurately, in review of what was already written: it depends on the airline's chosen configuration, more so than the aircraft itself.


Yeah no, we got to judge the situation based on actual fact though. No A380 have 3x5x3 configs to this day, they might in the future, but unless that's happen it's a no.

10-abreast B777 on the other hand, became the norm these days. Same goes for 10-abreast A350 on LCC or 9-abreast on A330.


Norm? That is a minor exaggeration. Only regional or premium-heavy 777s can get a 3-4-3 configuration without failing to reach the destination. There are also loads of 777 with a 2-3-2 business and 3-3-3 economy, which I think is the most humane configuration.
BTW, since when does airlines get 9-abreast 330s? 9-abreast 787 is already the bottom line, and a 9-abreast 330 will be unbearable.
 
trex8
Posts: 5213
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Mon Dec 24, 2018 3:32 pm

B1168 wrote:
[
BTW, since when does airlines get 9-abreast 330s? 9-abreast 787 is already the bottom line, and a 9-abreast 330 will be unbearable.

Air Asia X, Cebu Air, LionAir, Air Transat, French Bee and even Philippines, just off the top of my head.
Last edited by trex8 on Mon Dec 24, 2018 3:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
trex8
Posts: 5213
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Mon Dec 24, 2018 3:33 pm

B1168 wrote:
[
BTW, since when does airlines get 9-abreast 330s? 9-abreast 787 is already the bottom line, and a 9-abreast 330 will be unbearable.

Air Asia X, Cebu Air, Lion Air, Air Transat, French Bee and even Philippines, just off the top of my head.
 
B1168
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Mon Dec 24, 2018 3:37 pm

trex8 wrote:
B1168 wrote:
[
BTW, since when does airlines get 9-abreast 330s? 9-abreast 787 is already the bottom line, and a 9-abreast 330 will be unbearable.

Air Asia X, Cebu Air, Lion Air, Air Transat, French Bee and even Philippines, just off the top of my head.


Then a 8 hour flight of MNL-SYD in 321neo seems even better than 332.
 
workhorse
Posts: 535
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Mon Dec 24, 2018 5:08 pm

B1168 wrote:
Let’s pray no lower deck of A380 get a 3-5-3 configuration?


That would require a significant redesign of the cabin (i.e. heightening the floor). I am under the impression that Airbus decided to not invest a single penny into the A380 program anymore. So I think the A380 are safe from "improvements" for the moment.

B1168 wrote:
BTW I begin to fear airlines load 7-abreast in the 3.96-meter-wide (for Americans, 13 feet) C919.


That would be illegal under the civil aviation rules of just about any country.
 
masi1157
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 11:56 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Mon Dec 24, 2018 5:45 pm

The question here was not, how many seats there are or can be in an A380, B777 or C919. It was about the A330-900 of TAP, which has 8 abreast economy seating just like the wide majority of A330 (and A340, A300, A310). So how ist the A330-900 compared to an 8 abreast A330-300?

Gruß, masi1157
503 different segments on 98 airlines to 208 airports in 55 countries
 
B1168
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Mon Dec 24, 2018 6:35 pm

workhorse wrote:
B1168 wrote:
Let’s pray no lower deck of A380 get a 3-5-3 configuration?


That would require a significant redesign of the cabin (i.e. heightening the floor). I am under the impression that Airbus decided to not invest a single penny into the A380 program anymore. So I think the A380 are safe from "improvements" for the moment.

B1168 wrote:
BTW I begin to fear airlines load 7-abreast in the 3.96-meter-wide (for Americans, 13 feet) C919.


That would be illegal under the civil aviation rules of just about any country.


What is the minimum width per pax & aisle as required by FAA? That is the core of the issue.
If C919 was designed 30 cm wider, that would be great... yet it is gone.
 
rbrunner
Topic Author
Posts: 661
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:13 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Mon Dec 24, 2018 7:59 pm

Thank you, masi1157. Apparently, none of the members who posted flew A330neo yet. Happy X-Mas everybody.
 
MartijnNL
Posts: 529
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:44 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:12 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Delta for example offers it, to anyone who's willing to ....*gasp*.... PAY for it

They even offer (...) 1-2-1 configuration if you buy business class ticket!

Oh I know, in them quite often. :razz:

Do you pay for it with your own money?
 
workhorse
Posts: 535
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Wed Dec 26, 2018 12:58 pm

B1168 wrote:
What is the minimum width per pax & aisle as required by FAA? That is the core of the issue.
If C919 was designed 30 cm wider, that would be great... yet it is gone.


It's not a question of width. FAA (and just about any civil aviation authority in the world) forbids putting passengers more than 2 seats away from the aisle (for evacuation reasons).

So, a 7-abreast airplane will neccessarily have to be a twin-aisle (2-3-2). You can't do a 3-4.

Also, it means that the biggest number of seats per row that you can have is 11: 3-5-3. A380 could in principle accommodate that on the lower deck, but that would require significant modifications of the cabin (heightening of the floor) that would be relatively expensive to design, implement and certify. Airbus is not willing to invest such money into the A380 program right now.
 
masi1157
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 11:56 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Wed Dec 26, 2018 2:05 pm

workhorse wrote:
Also, it means that the biggest number of seats per row that you can have is 11: 3-5-3.

No, also 12 would be possible with that rule: 3-6-3. But all that has nothing to do with the question here: How is an A330-900 compared to an A330-300 from the passenger's perspective? TAP's A330-900 are 8-abreast in economy, and the majority of A330-300 out there are too.


Gruß, masi1157
503 different segments on 98 airlines to 208 airports in 55 countries
 
B1168
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Wed Dec 26, 2018 4:59 pm

masi1157 wrote:
workhorse wrote:
Also, it means that the biggest number of seats per row that you can have is 11: 3-5-3.

No, also 12 would be possible with that rule: 3-6-3. But all that has nothing to do with the question here: How is an A330-900 compared to an A330-300 from the passenger's perspective? TAP's A330-900 are 8-abreast in economy, and the majority of A330-300 out there are too.


Gruß, masi1157


If a new engine is introduced, there should be less noise.
Also, newest seats might be introduced. That will be helpful, too.
However, I don’t think anything related to the frame (I.e., window size) will change.
 
B1168
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Wed Dec 26, 2018 5:12 pm

workhorse wrote:
B1168 wrote:
What is the minimum width per pax & aisle as required by FAA? That is the core of the issue.
If C919 was designed 30 cm wider, that would be great... yet it is gone.


It's not a question of width. FAA (and just about any civil aviation authority in the world) forbids putting passengers more than 2 seats away from the aisle (for evacuation reasons).

So, a 7-abreast airplane will neccessarily have to be a twin-aisle (2-3-2). You can't do a 3-4.

Also, it means that the biggest number of seats per row that you can have is 11: 3-5-3. A380 could in principle accommodate that on the lower deck, but that would require significant modifications of the cabin (heightening of the floor) that would be relatively expensive to design, implement and certify. Airbus is not willing to invest such money into the A380 program right now.


So, are there any abreast width limits that bans C919 from having a 2-3-2 config?
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 1873
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Wed Dec 26, 2018 5:39 pm

trex8 wrote:
Air Asia X, Cebu Air, LionAir, Air Transat, French Bee and even Philippines, just off the top of my head.


How can you forget Air Caraibes, home of 3-4-3 A350s? (And 3-3-3 A330s, of course).

PR is half and half (7 3-3-3 abreast, 8 2-4-2 abreast). And TS not only put 3-3-3 in their A330s, they also do that with their A310s (Same fuseluge diameter/width).

SE Asian LCCs with mid to long haul routes certainly loves their 3-3-3 A330s, though.
 
masi1157
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 11:56 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Wed Dec 26, 2018 6:36 pm

B1168 wrote:
If a new engine is introduced, there should be less noise.

True in those areas where engine noise is dominant. On A330 that is the back of the cabin.

B1168 wrote:
Also, newest seats might be introduced. That will be helpful, too.

Yes, but I would assume TAP would install exactly the same seats if their new aircraft was an A330-300. So that surely is not related to it being a -900.

B1168 wrote:
However, I don’t think anything related to the frame (I.e., window size) will change.

Sure, there is minimum change to the fuselage. But there might be a few (minor) changes to systems and there surely are changes to the wing and its aerodynamics. Perhaps that makes a (very small) difference in gust sensitivity? Probably not to extent that a passenger feels it imediately on his first flight with it.


Gruß, masi1157
503 different segments on 98 airlines to 208 airports in 55 countries
 
User avatar
aeromoe
Posts: 691
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:34 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Wed Dec 26, 2018 10:06 pm

workhorse wrote:
(and THAT does not depend on the airline, no airline has 2-4-2 in A350)


Umm...SQ A350 (ULR config) have 2-4-2 in Premium Economy...and even 1-4-1 in the last three rows of PE. I was happy to occupy just such single seat on Dec 2 and Dec 6 doing EWR-SIN-EWR just for the experience. The seats are less than desirable for photography out the window since the large storage container is between the seat and sidewall, but you can't do much better for an economy experience.

Moe
AA AC AS BA BD BF BN BR BY B6 CO CZ DG DL EA EI EN FL FT F9 HA HP ICX JI J7 KE KS LH MC NW OC OO OZ(1) OZ(2) PA PI PT QQ RM RO RV(1) RV(2) RW SK SM SQ S4 TI TS TW UA UK US UZ VS VX WA WN WS W7 XV YV YX(2) ZZ 9K
 
VSMUT
Posts: 2154
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:15 pm

B1168 wrote:
workhorse wrote:
B1168 wrote:
What is the minimum width per pax & aisle as required by FAA? That is the core of the issue.
If C919 was designed 30 cm wider, that would be great... yet it is gone.


It's not a question of width. FAA (and just about any civil aviation authority in the world) forbids putting passengers more than 2 seats away from the aisle (for evacuation reasons).

So, a 7-abreast airplane will neccessarily have to be a twin-aisle (2-3-2). You can't do a 3-4.

Also, it means that the biggest number of seats per row that you can have is 11: 3-5-3. A380 could in principle accommodate that on the lower deck, but that would require significant modifications of the cabin (heightening of the floor) that would be relatively expensive to design, implement and certify. Airbus is not willing to invest such money into the A380 program right now.


So, are there any abreast width limits that bans C919 from having a 2-3-2 config?


Not that I know, but:
1. It would be highly impractical. Passengers still have to get in and out, trolleys pass through the cabin and passengers must be able to squeeze into the seats. An extra aisle would correspond roughly to an extra seat width, so we would in practice be talking about stuffing another 2 seats in.
2. You still have to comply with the maximum certified capacity, and narrower aisles will ultimately impede on this limit.

Trust me, no C919 will ever feature anything more than 3+3. It was never in the cards and never will be. It is wider, but it isn't that much wider.
 
B1168
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:02 pm

VSMUT wrote:
B1168 wrote:
workhorse wrote:

It's not a question of width. FAA (and just about any civil aviation authority in the world) forbids putting passengers more than 2 seats away from the aisle (for evacuation reasons).

So, a 7-abreast airplane will neccessarily have to be a twin-aisle (2-3-2). You can't do a 3-4.

Also, it means that the biggest number of seats per row that you can have is 11: 3-5-3. A380 could in principle accommodate that on the lower deck, but that would require significant modifications of the cabin (heightening of the floor) that would be relatively expensive to design, implement and certify. Airbus is not willing to invest such money into the A380 program right now.


So, are there any abreast width limits that bans C919 from having a 2-3-2 config?


Not that I know, but:
1. It would be highly impractical. Passengers still have to get in and out, trolleys pass through the cabin and passengers must be able to squeeze into the seats. An extra aisle would correspond roughly to an extra seat width, so we would in practice be talking about stuffing another 2 seats in.
2. You still have to comply with the maximum certified capacity, and narrower aisles will ultimately impede on this limit.

Trust me, no C919 will ever feature anything more than 3+3. It was never in the cards and never will be. It is wider, but it isn't that much wider.


That is great to know. Luckily, a 3-3-3 A330 will be the limit.
 
masi1157
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 11:56 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:27 pm

And still: TAP's A330-900 has 2-4-2 seating in economy. So simply compare it to the wide majority of existing 2-4-2 A330-300.


Gruß, masi1157
503 different segments on 98 airlines to 208 airports in 55 countries
 
trex8
Posts: 5213
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Mon Dec 31, 2018 1:15 am

3-4 on Trident did happen once
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive ... 01998.html
since late 60s FAA rules about not being more than 2 seats from aisle prevent that.
 
User avatar
ojjunior
Posts: 694
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:31 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:37 am

Apiculteur wrote:
Has anyone attempted to answer the original question? TAP? 330neo LIS-GRU-LIS? Pax experience?

Wondering the same...
Dozens of off topic replies so far...
 
Junglejames
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2019 4:07 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Jan 05, 2019 5:25 am

LAX772LR wrote:
99% of a "passenger experience" is going to depend on the airline, its soft service, and its chosen configuration...

...most of that has nothing to do with an airframe; especially a long-extant one whose modifications are mostly outside of the pax cabin.


Yes and no I'm afraid.
From a mere mortals perspective. Someone who's knowledge is nowhere near what most of yous on here would be, and is merely picked up by flying to get to and from work (literally an ordinary passenger if you like, although I admittedly don't like that term), I know what pushes me to certain flights.
First and foremost, it is the type of aircraft. Then comes the airline. I have preferred aircraft, and preferred airlines.
Admittedly this probably applies more to economy class travel though, as this is where I see the least difference between airlines. As long as an aircraft is in 'As designed' configuration (Ie 8 or 9 or 10 abreast), it is pushing it to claim my preference is down to airline, although this is partly the reason agreed. Certainly not 99% of the reason though. More like 50/50 shall we call it.

So if I dare be so bold. Let's try and list of preferences, and whether it is aircraft or airline.

1- A380 (aircraft through and through, no ifs, no buts)
2- A340 (aircraft, assuming in designed config, but I have never done 9 abreast if they exist). It is down to how quiet this aircraft is. 2nd only to A380.
3- A330 (again aircraft, because of quietness)
4- Probably the A350. Again, down to the aircraft and how quiet it is.
5- Close run thing with the A350, but a 777 in designed config (Ie 9 abreast). But 777 is where airline does start coming into it. In this case, Singapore and BA.
6- 747 (getting a bit noisy, but a nice aircraft). Airline has nothing to do with this, although I'd obviosly prefer the likes of BA if given a choice.

Looking a long way below any of the above now
7- BA 787 (I'm not the only one who can't work out the term 'dreamliner, and all this stuff about being quiet? It is worse than the A340 and probably the A330). As we have next to no 787s in designed config, we will put this aircraft down to airline preference. BA have the better seats.
8- KLM 777 (this being the airline obviously)
9- Air France and Emirates 777 and Qatar 787 (some of the worst aircraft to fly on, and yes, down to the airline mainly).

I've stuck with airlines I know in economy, therefore it is possible there is better than the BA 787 for example.

To give another example of aircraft/ airline. My next upcoming flight, I had a choice of BA and Iberia. With BA being on my preferred airline list, you'd assume I plumped for BA? But no. I went Iberia. Why? Aircraft type. The A340 trumps the 787. Even if the 787 was 8 abreast, I'd still go for the A340.

So sorry, your 99% airline idea is miles out.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 11454
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sat Jan 05, 2019 7:41 am

Junglejames wrote:
Aircraft type. The A340 trumps the 787.

Do you somehow not recognize the abject lack of objectivity in that statement, or really any of the above?

E.g. "Trumps it" at what, exactly... ?
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Junglejames
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2019 4:07 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sun Jan 06, 2019 4:19 am

LAX772LR wrote:
Junglejames wrote:
Aircraft type. The A340 trumps the 787.

Do you somehow not recognize the abject lack of objectivity in that statement, or really any of the above?

E.g. "Trumps it" at what, exactly... ?


I did make it quite clear the post was based on this mere mortals flying experience as a passenger.
Are you unable to accept someone else's view point?
Can people not have preferences without fully explaining, to your satisfaction, why that may be the case?

I also made it clear what made the A340 so good in my eyes. It is the quietness of the cabin.
But if we want a full run down on what makes the A340 a better aircraft in this passengers eyes, then here goes. Some sensible, some stupid, but if you are unable to accept, then I will be just as silly:
Cabin noise levels, and type of noise.
Seat width, which as already mentioned, is down to airlines not fitting 787 as designed.
Aircraft looks.
Number of engines.
Length of longest version
Proper shades that don't fail and are easy to use.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 11454
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:39 am

Junglejames wrote:
I did make it quite clear the post was based on this mere mortals flying experience as a passenger.

Then proceeded to make a bunch of proclamations as if they were fact, hence the response. Pretty straightforward really.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
masi1157
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 11:56 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sun Jan 06, 2019 11:54 am

LAX772LR wrote:
Then proceeded to make a bunch of proclamations as if they were fact, hence the response. Pretty straightforward really.

Reading his post I found it very obvious that he was giving his own opinion, not any "facts". And it was also very obvious, why in his opinion "The A340 trumps the 787". He had said it earlier in the same post. About the A340: "It is down to how quiet this aircraft is." About the B787: "It is worse than the A340 and probably the A330". I don't see any reason for your comments. And again, all that has nothing to do with the topic here, it is about TAP's A330-900, not about A340 vs. B787.


Gruß, masi1157
503 different segments on 98 airlines to 208 airports in 55 countries
 
Junglejames
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2019 4:07 am

Re: A330-900 Passenger experience

Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:02 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
Junglejames wrote:
I did make it quite clear the post was based on this mere mortals flying experience as a passenger.

Then proceeded to make a bunch of proclamations as if they were fact, hence the response. Pretty straightforward really.


1- Just because I don't put the words- "My opinion" before every sentence doesn't mean that i am suddenly making my proclamations forward as fact. That is pretty straightforward really.

2- is that similar to how you made a proclamation as if it were fact, with no basis of evidence, only to then get annoyed when I, and others, came along and said you were incorrect?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: alancostello, Jetty and 23 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