Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Quoting Tupolev160 (Thread starter): How did it come the 3-3-3 became much more popular over the 2-5-2 |
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 2): 2-5-2 is horrible for passengers who wind up in the middle seat in the 5-abreast section. |
Quoting PanAm788 (Reply 1): A 2-5-2 configuration requires 4 boxes, while a 3-3-3 configuration requires 3 |
Quoting kmot (Reply 6): The other plus was that more people were only one seat away from an aisle. |
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. |
Quoting exFWAOONW (Reply 9): Unless you have more aisles, how can you have more seat one away from an aisle? |
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. |
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? |
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. |
Quoting doug_Or (Reply 13): Because the middle seat in the middle set is 1 away from both aisles |
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. |
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 |
Quoting threeifbyair (Reply 10): Anyone want to revisit "When will NW Retire its DC9s?" while we're at it? |
Quoting Tupolev160 (Thread starter): Transaero or Malaysia Airlines use the much more passenger-friendly 2-5-2 layout. |
Quoting carpethead (Reply 18): Most of NH's 77W have been reconfigured to 2-4-3. |
Quoting cipango (Reply 26): 2-4-3? Not sure if this is real or a typo? |
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/ |
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 28): At KL and NZ only the 77Ws are 3-4-3. Their 772ERs are 3-3-3. |
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. |
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. |
Quoting gigneil (Reply 30): 3-3-3 sucks. With teeth. NS |
Quoting carpethead (Reply 16): Most of NH's 77W have been reconfigured to 2-4-3. |
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. |
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! |
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 35): Most early DC-10s and L-1011s (at least those operated by U.S. carriers) were 2-4-2 |
Quoting PanAm788 (Reply 1): Also the 3-3-3 configuration avoids the horrible seat in the middle of the 2-5-2 section. |
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? |
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. |
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. |
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). |
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. |