Seat Arrangements On Boeing 777: 2-5-2 Vs 3-3-3?

Tupolev160 · Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:53 pm

We all know that most of the airlines use the 3-3-3 or the 3-4-3 layout on this model, with all the discomfort it brings.Yet, some other airlines, such as Transaero or Malaysia Airlines use the much more passenger-friendly 2-5-2 layout.
How did it come the 3-3-3 became much more popular over the 2-5-2 and do you know of any other airlines besides those two using a similar seating configuration in economy?
Who/what factors decide about that and is there any way for passengers to give their voice over which seating arrangement they prefer to endure on long and ultra-long haul flights? Which seating arrangement do you enjoy better? Thanks.

[Edited 2012-03-28 15:57:56]

[Edited 2012-03-28 15:58:39]

[Edited 2012-03-28 15:59:04]

PanAm788 · Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:00 pm

IFE boxes host 3 seats each. A 2-5-2 configuration requires 4 boxes, while a 3-3-3 configuration requires 3, saving weight. Also the 3-3-3 configuration avoids the horrible seat in the middle of the 2-5-2 section. There was a recent thread on this, I believe (not that this isn't a good topic).

Viscount724 · Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:04 pm

Quoting Tupolev160 (Thread starter):
How did it come the 3-3-3 became much more popular over the 2-5-2

2-5-2 is horrible for passengers who wind up in the middle seat in the 5-abreast section.

I believe another reason is that 2-5-2 requires 4 underseat control boxes for the inflight entertainment system while 3-3-3 only requires 3 (one for each 3-seat unit). 3-3-3 also reduces the number of seat types needed and makes maintenance and seat replacement easier.

3-3-3 also means a greater chance of an empty seat next to you if the flight isn't full compared to 2-5-2.

Tupolev160 · Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:14 pm

I looked for a similar topic before posting but didn't found it. Why would the middle seat in the 2-5-2 be more uncomfortable than the windows seats on 3-3-3. Not everybody loves windows and you would still have to cross two people to get to the corridor. Just that here there would only be 1 line of people that would need to cross two guys, instead of 2 as on 3-3-3. Just try to exit from A or I seats during the meal in a 777. Im really irritated with the 3-3-3 and especially 3-4-3 arrangement while - i might be the only one on this - i never saw the point of introducing IFE into aviation. I purely hate it and can't understand why can't we live even few hours without electronics and entertainment, is like being dependent on a psychoactive drug.

hhslax2 · Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:24 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 2):
2-5-2 is horrible for passengers who wind up in the middle seat in the 5-abreast section.

Not if you play your cards right. I sat next to a guy once that was hitting up the flight attendants in both aisles for booze during dinner and drink services.

Quoting PanAm788 (Reply 1):
A 2-5-2 configuration requires 4 boxes, while a 3-3-3 configuration requires 3

I don't buy that argument, unless our airline workers aren't smart enough to be able to wire seats in different rows to the same box. Sure it's not as pretty, but it can be done.

rwy04lga · Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:31 pm

Just a guess....Having only 3-seat sections, rather than having both a 2-seat section and a 5-seat section, can only make it easier for an airline.

kmot · Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:37 pm

When I worked at UA as a Flight Attendant, I loved the 2-5-2 layout. Unless the flight is completely full, the center seat was left empty. In addition, it better allowed families of 4 to sit together. The other plus was that more people were only one seat away from an aisle.

Tupolev160 · Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:43 pm

Quoting kmot (Reply 6):
The other plus was that more people were only one seat away from an aisle.

That's just what i was talking about.

Quoting rwy04lga (Reply 5):
Quoting PanAm788 (Reply 1):
A 2-5-2 configuration requires 4 boxes, while a 3-3-3 configuration requires 3

I don't buy that argument, unless our airline workers aren't smart enough to be able to wire seats in different rows to the same box. Sure it's not as pretty, but it can be done.

I think the same way, why would it be difficult to pass a cable under the carpet or through the floor.

tommy767 · Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:45 pm

3-3-3 was really nice when I flew LAX-IAD on UA in January.

exFWAOONW · Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:49 pm

Quoting kmot (Reply 6):
The other plus was that more people were only one seat away from an aisle.

Unless you have more aisles, how can you have more seat one away from an aisle?

threeifbyair · Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:57 pm

Quoting exFWAOONW (Reply 9):

Unless you have more aisles, how can you have more seat one away from an aisle?

In a 3-3-3 configuration, both window seats are 2 seats removed from the aisle.

In a 2-5-2 configuration, only the middle seat of the "5" block is 2 seats removed from the aisle.

I remember many flights on NW DC-10s in the 2-5-2 configuration - perhaps that was preferred before in-seat IFE became popular.

"2-5-2 vs. 3-3-3" is becoming one of A.net's eternal questions. Anyone want to revisit "When will NW Retire its DC9s?" while we're at it?

dc9northwest · Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:58 pm

Quoting exFWAOONW (Reply 9):
Unless you have more aisles, how can you have more seat one away from an aisle?

2-5-2:
at aisle: 4 seats
1 seat away: 4 seats
2 away: 1 seat

3-3-3:
at aisle: 4 seats
1 seat away: 3 seats
2 seats away: 2 seats

Long live the dying 2-5-2!

DualQual · Thu Mar 29, 2012 12:00 am

Quoting Tupolev160 (Reply 7):
I think the same way, why would it be difficult to pass a cable under the carpet or through the floor.

Remember it's an airplane, not your living room. The certification for the IFE only allows for it to be installed a certain way. To deviate from that requires money for a new certification. It's probably not worth it.

doug_or · Thu Mar 29, 2012 12:00 am

Quoting exFWAOONW (Reply 9):
Unless you have more aisles, how can you have more seat one away from an aisle?

Because the middle seat in the middle set is 1 away from both aisles

Viscount724 · Thu Mar 29, 2012 12:12 am

Quoting exFWAOONW (Reply 9):
Quoting kmot (Reply 6):
The other plus was that more people were only one seat away from an aisle.

Unless you have more aisles, how can you have more seat one away from an aisle?

With 2-5-2, 8 of the 9 seats are no more than one seat from an aisle (all seats except the middle seat in the 5-abreast section). With 3-3-3 only 7 of the 9 seats are no more than one seat from an aisle (all seats except the 2 window seats).

The difference is that many passenges prefer window seats, thus don't mind being 2 seats from the aisle in exchange for having the window seat. However, nobody in their right mind would voluntarily select the middle seat in the 5-abreast section, but with today's high load factors many passengers will wind up in one of those seats if they check in late. With 3-3-3 the situation never arises.

If there were benefits to the carriers from 2-5-2, there would be more than the current very few with 2-5-2 on 777s. DL was 2-5-2 originally on their 772ERs but changed to 3-3-3. Isn't UA also changing the PMUA 777s from 2-5-2 to 3-3-3 to match the PMCO configuration?

As a sidenote, there were and may still be a few 777s with 3-4-2 seating like the original 9-abreast layout on early 747s (before they changed to 10-abreast 3-4-3 in the mid to late 1970s). Egyptair 772s were delivered with 3-4-2 and presumably still are. I think their 77Ws are 3-3-3.

Many MD-11s were also 3-4-2 (or 2-4-3). KLM's were 2-4-3 originally but when they updated the cabins and installed PTVs in Y class 3 or 4 years ago, the original 2-4-3 seats were replaced with 3-3-3. Swissair's MD-11s were 3-4-2 with the 3-abreast unit on the left side (facing forward). With KLM's original configuration the 3-abreast unit was on the right side.

aloges · Thu Mar 29, 2012 12:38 am

I've grown to like 3-3-3. The reason is simple: when the plane isn't full, I have a much better chance of getting three seats for myself. Two seats are useless for sleeping and there are few blocks of five seats that do remain empty, apart from me sitting in one.

Carpethead · Thu Mar 29, 2012 3:41 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 14):
As a sidenote, there were and may still be a few 777s with 3-4-2 seating like the original 9-abreast layout on early 747s (before they changed to 10-abreast 3-4-3 in the mid to late 1970s). Egyptair 772s were delivered with 3-4-2 and presumably still are. I think their 77Ws are 3-3-3.

Most of NH's 77W have been reconfigured to 2-4-3.

UALWN · Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:37 am

Quoting doug_Or (Reply 13):
Because the middle seat in the middle set is 1 away from both aisles

Which is a further advantage of the 2-5-2 layout. The window person (that would be me, for instance) in a 3-3-3 layout, only has one way to get to the aisle, and if one of the two pax between him and the aisle is asleep, or elderly, or whatever, he will have to bother him anyway. However, the (unfortunate) person in the middle of the 2-5-2 layout has two possible paths to the aisles, and he can choose the most convenient at any given time.

EY460 · Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:44 am

I also believe that the 2-5-2 layout has several advantages over the 3-3-3 layout. However, airline's economics are pushing for the 3-3-3 so that's the most common one. Are modern IFE system boxes still grouped in 3?

tonystan · Thu Mar 29, 2012 11:44 am

Quoting Tupolev160 (Reply 3):
Why would the middle seat in the 2-5-2 be more uncomfortable than the windows seats on 3-3-3. Not everybody loves windows and you would still have to cross two people to get to the corridor.

Research has shown that a Window seat is far more preferable then a middle seat. A middle seat with no personal space that requires you to disturb not just one but two people will always lose out to the same disturbance but with the ability to enjoy the views outside or rest your head up against the wall. Plus Windows are popular with many people requesting them at time of seat allocation so they are easier to offload regardless of how many people are seated beside it then a middle seat!

CXB77L · Thu Mar 29, 2012 12:59 pm

Quoting Tupolev160 (Reply 3):
Why would the middle seat in the 2-5-2 be more uncomfortable than the windows seats on 3-3-3

Because a window seat in a 3-3-3 configuration at least has a window you can look out of, or, if someone doesn't like the window, they can lean against the wall. The middle seat of a 2-5-2 configuration could mean having 2 people on either side of you, without anywhere to lean even if you wanted to.

RaginMav · Thu Mar 29, 2012 1:47 pm

Quoting threeifbyair (Reply 10):
Anyone want to revisit "When will NW Retire its DC9s?" while we're at it?

Yeah we need a new horse to beat, since those -9's are going to be replace by FL's 717's!

Back on topic, I dislike 3x3x3 so much I went out of my way to book 767's for an upcoming trip to LHR. Two seats for me and the Mrs.

Gemuser · Thu Mar 29, 2012 1:53 pm

Quoting RaginMav (Reply 23):
Back on topic, I dislike 3x3x3 so much I went out of my way to book 767's for an upcoming trip to LHR. Two seats for me and the Mrs.

It's better than 3-4-3 on a B777! Which EK, NZ, AF, & KL (at least) use on theirs

Gemuser

AA777223 · Thu Mar 29, 2012 2:12 pm

Quoting Tupolev160 (Thread starter):
Transaero or Malaysia Airlines use the much more passenger-friendly 2-5-2 layout.

No one has mentioned yet, by far the largest global airline to install 2-5-2, and keep it is AA. I think this is due to overwhelming input from AAdvantage members, like myself. I have started and contributed to threads like this numerous times. However, most of my logic has already been explained here. long live the 2-5-2!

[Edited 2012-03-29 07:20:06]

Cipango · Thu Mar 29, 2012 3:19 pm

Quoting carpethead (Reply 18):
Most of NH's 77W have been reconfigured to 2-4-3.

2-4-3? Not sure if this is real or a typo?

CXB77L · Thu Mar 29, 2012 3:52 pm

Quoting cipango (Reply 26):
2-4-3? Not sure if this is real or a typo?

Yes, it's real: NH's lowest density configuration on their 77Ws only seat 215, with Y class in a 2-4-3 configuration.

https://www.ana.co.jp/wws/japan/e/as...mon/inflight/seatmap/b777_300er_1/

[Edited 2012-03-29 08:53:09]

EY460 · Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:19 pm

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 27):
Yes, it's real: NH's lowest density configuration on their 77Ws only seat 215, with Y class in a 2-4-3 configuration.

https://www.ana.co.jp/wws/japan/e/as...mon/inflight/seatmap/b777_300er_1/

I know that I'm going off topic, but is ANA removing premium economy from his planes? The B777-300ER is the only plane offering it.

YULWinterSkies · Thu Mar 29, 2012 7:39 pm

Also, the overhead bins are better designed to fit 3-3-3 rather than 2-5-2.
Never mind, long live the A330 and the 2-4-2.

Viscount724 · Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:00 pm

Quoting gemuser (Reply 24):
It's better than 3-4-3 on a B777! Which EK, NZ, AF, & KL (at least) use on theirs

At KL and NZ only the 77Ws are 3-4-3. Their 772ERs are 3-3-3.

gigneil · Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:10 pm

3-3-3 sucks. Bad.

NS

gigneil · Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:10 pm

3-3-3 sucks. With teeth.

NS

Tupolev160 · Thu Mar 29, 2012 11:55 pm

Hope someone from the airline industry who decides about these things heard us...

Gemuser · Fri Mar 30, 2012 1:29 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 28):
At KL and NZ only the 77Ws are 3-4-3. Their 772ERs are 3-3-3.

Don't know about KL, but NZ is converting their B772s to 3-4-3 according to the NZ Aviation thread.

Gemuser

pnd100 · Fri Mar 30, 2012 1:46 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 14):
As a sidenote, there were and may still be a few 777s with 3-4-2 seating like the original 9-abreast layout on early 747s (before they changed to 10-abreast 3-4-3 in the mid to late 1970s). Egyptair 772s were delivered with 3-4-2 and presumably still are. I think their 77Ws are 3-3-3.

Many MD-11s were also 3-4-2 (or 2-4-3). KLM's were 2-4-3 originally but when they updated the cabins and installed PTVs in Y class 3 or 4 years ago, the original 2-4-3 seats were replaced with 3-3-3. Swissair's MD-11s were 3-4-2 with the 3-abreast unit on the left side (facing forward). With KLM's original configuration the 3-abreast unit was on the right side.

3-4-2 or 2-4-3 appears to be the ideal configuration in my humble opinion. Is this configuration not economically viable or technically unsound? Why is 3-3-3 or 2-5-2 preferred to these?

Schweigend · Fri Mar 30, 2012 6:30 am

United had their 777s, first delivered in Spring 1995, configured 2-5-2 because they were initially meant to replace DC-10s one-for-one, and DC-10s are 2-5-2.

Was the DC-10 ever flown with 3-3-3 in coach? Douglas must have done an analysis of which configuration would be better -- they chose 2-5-2, as did Lockheed with their L-1011. I wonder what their thinking at the time was.

Load factors were lower back then, and likely that middle seat in the five-block was usually left empty, making for a better pax experience. Today, with LFs usually over 80%, 3-3-3 makes better sense.

Viscount724 · Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:45 pm

Quoting Schweigend (Reply 34):
Was the DC-10 ever flown with 3-3-3 in coach? Douglas must have done an analysis of which configuration would be better -- they chose 2-5-2, as did Lockheed with their L-1011. I wonder what their thinking at the time was.

I can't recall any 3-3-3 DC-10s or L-1011s. There were 3-4-3 DC-10s and L-1011s, mainly those operated by charter/leisure carriers, although BA's early L-1011-1s used within Europe were 3-4-3 (when 2-4-2 was common on many other carriers). Pan Am's 12 L-1011-500s wee also delivered with cramped 10-abreast 3-4-3 seating which always surprised me since it made their L15s very cramped compared to their 747s.

2-5-2 on the DC-10 and L-1011 may have been at least partly related to ease of access to the overhead bins. Replacing the 2-seat units near the windows with a 3-seat unit may have made for a rather long reach to the relatively narrow bins on the DC-10. The L-1011 also had bins that didn't protrude very far beyond the 2 window seats.

Most early DC-10s and L-1011s (at least those operated by U.S. carriers) were 2-4-2 (comparable to 3-4-2 on early 747s). When they went from 8 to 9-abreast, the new 5-seat center unit wasn't much longer end-to-end than the 4-seat unit it replaced, so 2-5-2 may have been best to align the seats with the overhead bins. Going from 2 to 3 seats along the windows would have also required changing the emegency oxygen mask systems and IFE controls, reading lights etc. Limiting those changes to just the center section likely reduced the reconfiguration costs.

As already mentioned, many MD-11s had 3-4-2 (or 2-4-3) seating rather than 2-5-2, although the MD-11s overhead bins were also larger than those on early DC-10s

ZSOFN · Fri Mar 30, 2012 10:41 pm

Quoting gigneil (Reply 30):
3-3-3 sucks. With teeth.

NS

I often travel with my wife so 2-5-2 is preferable as you tend to get the ideal window/aisle combination - that said, of all the aircraft with a potential 3-3-3 layout the 777 is the most comfortable given the shape of the overhead bins;

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

scutfarcus · Sun Apr 01, 2012 5:00 pm

Etihad's 777s have 3-4-3 ... I was kind of shocked when i discovered this after being told what a great airline they were. Seems to have been a recent change as seat guru still shows them as 3-3-3 ... but when I checked in suddenly there was an extra seat in my row!

Tradewinds · Sun Apr 01, 2012 5:14 pm

Quoting carpethead (Reply 16):
Most of NH's 77W have been reconfigured to 2-4-3.

Flew NH's 773 JFK-NRT and back last month and really liked the layout. Good options for people traveling as a family, as a couple, etc.

pnd100 · Sun Apr 01, 2012 11:50 pm

Quoting Tradewinds (Reply 38):

Quoting carpethead (Reply 16):
Most of NH's 77W have been reconfigured to 2-4-3.

Flew NH's 773 JFK-NRT and back last month and really liked the layout. Good options for people traveling as a family, as a couple, etc.

See this is what I was saying. From a passenger standpoint I feel that this layout (2-4-3 or 3-4-2) provides the most flexibility. I wanted to know why then this configuration had not caught on worldwide. I suspect that it may have to do with economics or weight balance maybe. Could anyone on a.net please clarify this for me please?

mogandoCI · Mon Apr 02, 2012 3:39 am

people keep measuring seat desirability by # of seats from aisle .... and forgot that a window seat is highly preferable to a large swath of the population that don't mind to hop across 2 seats to the aisle

the way i see it as :

3-3-3
2 window seats (that's a plus)
4 aisle seats (that's a plus)
3 middle seats 1-seat away from aisle (acceptable)

2-5-2
2 window seats
4 aisle seats
2 middle seats 1-seat away from aisle
1 center seat 2-seats away from either aisle (absolutely horrific)

ytz · Mon Apr 02, 2012 4:02 am

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 40):
1 center seat 2-seats away from either aisle (absolutely horrific)

True. But it's only relevant when load in the Y cabin is greater than 88%. Do airlines actually get that high often?

RyanairGuru · Mon Apr 02, 2012 6:57 am

Quoting scutfarcus (Reply 37):
Etihad's 777s have 3-4-3 ... I was kind of shocked when i discovered this after being told what a great airline they were. Seems to have been a recent change as seat guru still shows them as 3-3-3 ... but when I checked in suddenly there was an extra seat in my row!

It is a recent change, last time I flew on an EY 77W back in 09 it was 3-3-3. Did you still have a good flight regardless?

mogandoCI · Mon Apr 02, 2012 9:21 am

Quoting YTZ (Reply 41):

These days, 88+% is all too often, esp on the popular long haul flights where the 777 plow, which makes matter much worse because it's a bad seat for 14 hours instead of just a transcon

BE77 · Mon Apr 02, 2012 12:02 pm

The main advantage to the '5' was in the bad old days of regulation and when many, many companies subsidised their national carriers.
Once tourist season was over, we would often fly on L1011's that were almost empty and which were 2-5-2.

If it was daytime, you always got the window seat with an empty aisle seat.

On redeye's (which was most of the time), it was quite common to get a 5 row to yourself, almost as good as a new flatbed F or J cabin without the cost....generally I could get 5 hours of sleep on a 5.5 hour flight. In fact, once I recall getting bumped to J, getting the meal service, then walking to the Y cabin to get my sleep (J in those days was just a recliner on almost every airline).

Now, with fuller flights, it does become a tossup. If the flight is 'always' full, then a 3-3-3 is probably better. If the load factor is 88 or less, then the 2-5-2 is better. I haven't seen 2-4-3 myself, but that really sounds like the best solution all around.

As for the IFE...I always hate it when something trivial like lazy engineering or lazy suppliers dictates that I need to arrange everything around their service or products - it shouldn't be that hard, even in aviation, to design a box with 5 plugs. Or, even better, if it is really that expensive to install an IFE box, don't install them and go with wifi for smart phones, tablets, etc. (I travel to a lot of less than fully developed countries, and most of them have as many smart phones in use as the west, especially if you are an airline customer in the first place).

coachclass · Mon Apr 02, 2012 2:14 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 35):
Most early DC-10s and L-1011s (at least those operated by U.S. carriers) were 2-4-2

Yes, when the L1011 first came out, there was a space (mini-closet) where the middle 5th seat is now located, that had hooks to hang your coats and store things.

fiscal · Mon Apr 02, 2012 10:43 pm

Quoting PanAm788 (Reply 1):
Also the 3-3-3 configuration avoids the horrible seat in the middle of the 2-5-2 section.

No it does not. In each set of three seats there is a middle seat.

Quoting EY460 (Reply 18):
I also believe that the 2-5-2 layout has several advantages over the 3-3-3 layout. However, airline's economics are pushing for the 3-3-3 so that's the most common one. Are modern IFE system boxes still grouped in 3?

Typical - money first customers second

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 20):
Because a window seat in a 3-3-3 configuration at least has a window you can look out of, or, if someone doesn't like the window, they can lean against the wall. The middle seat of a 2-5-2 configuration could mean having 2 people on either side of you, without anywhere to lean even if you wanted to.

As was mentioned before, at least in the 2-5-2 they can always leave the middle of the five seats free unless totally full. That must always be preferable for couples. If it is full, then at least about 60+ couples will be happy, where none would be on the 3-3-3.

When fly with my wife, I will not book any airline with a 3-3-3 economy seat if the flight is more than 2 hours. On a long haul I must also have the ability to pre book a seat to ensure a 2 seater.

mogandoCI · Mon Apr 02, 2012 10:49 pm

Quoting fiscal (Reply 46):
As was mentioned before, at least in the 2-5-2 they can always leave the middle of the five seats free unless totally full. That must always be preferable for couples. If it is full, then at least about 60+ couples will be happy, where none would be on the 3-3-3.

When fly with my wife, I will not book any airline with a 3-3-3 economy seat if the flight is more than 2 hours. On a long haul I must also have the ability to pre book a seat to ensure a 2 seater.

Other than choosing A330/340 operators (and the rare A380 operator that bothers to put Y in the upper deck), good luck finding airlines that still do 2-5-2 on the 777 (unless you really enjoying the ancient 767).

fiscal · Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:07 pm

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 47):
Other than choosing A330/340 operators (and the rare A380 operator that bothers to put Y in the upper deck), good luck finding airlines that still do 2-5-2 on the 777 (unless you really enjoying the ancient 767).

About to do a PER-LHR in economy (run out of money for J seats) Luckily Malaysia do an a333 PER - KUL then a 747 with a couple of 2 seaters at the rear, and returning from CDG - KUL it is a 772 in 2-5-2 format and back to PER in the a333. So all 2 seaters, and I was able to pre book the seat selections.

As for the ancient 767. I have done Royal Brunei PER - LHR in bygone days, and their 767's were very comfortable. Sadly, they no longer fly from PER, and replaced the 767 with a 777. Maybe that is why the route suffered and was withdrawn

Viscount724 · Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:42 pm

Quoting fiscal (Reply 46):
Quoting PanAm788 (Reply 1):
Also the 3-3-3 configuration avoids the horrible seat in the middle of the 2-5-2 section.

No it does not. In each set of three seats there is a middle seat.

But I would much rather be in a middle seat one seat from an aisle than in a middle seat 2 seats from an aisle (in both directions).

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net