New seats let airlines squeeze in more passengers

[Swadian Hardcore]

Ugh. 18" is borderline okay. 17" is torture for a flight longer than an hour or two. There's a reason a lot of movie houses are switching to 20" seats. It isn't even so much that people are heavier; there are lots of guys who are tall with broad shoulders and have to assume the croquet mallet position just to fit into the middle seat.

I know they want to get more people onto each plane, but at what expense?

On the other hand, if enough people get fed up, maybe they'll start using Amtrak.

I'm thin, seat width dosen't matter for me. I care more about the actual comfort of the seat, lumbar support, padding, headrest positioning, etc. That's why I'm happy to ride LD in a Greyhound 102DL3 even though they only have 17"x34" seats, they are better for sitting than the new seats on the newer buses.

 

[xyzzy]

Seat width matters to me. I can feel the additional butt-room in an Airbus narrowbody compared to a Boeing narrowbody. The idea of anything less than 18" transatlantic is awful.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Seat width matters to me. I can feel the additional butt-room in an Airbus narrowbody compared to a Boeing narrowbody. The idea of anything less than 18" transatlantic is awful.

But Airbus narrowbodies don't fly transatlantic.

 

[xyzzy]

Oh yes they do. Besides the small number of transatlantic 319s that are configured for all business class, Air Canada flies 319s with regular cabins into Heathrow part of the year.

But my comment wasn't limited to Airbus. Take the American 772, for example. The 9-abreast seats in the main cabin are 18 inches, just like the Main Cabin Extra seats in the 773. But the 10-abreast 773 main cabin cuts them down to 17 inches.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Oh yes they do. Besides the small number of transatlantic 319s that are configured for all business class, Air Canada flies 319s with regular cabins into Heathrow part of the year.

But my comment wasn't limited to Airbus. Take the American 772, for example. The 9-abreast seats in the main cabin are 18 inches, just like the Main Cabin Extra seats in the 773. But the 10-abreast 773 main cabin cuts them down to 17 inches.

Point understood.

 

[SarahZ]

Even when I was thin, I still hated 17" seats. I don't like my thigh touching a stranger's thigh. But then again, I'm super weird when it comes to personal space and being touched, so maybe it's a me thing and not a seat thing.

 

[railiner]

Even when I was thin, I still hated 17" seats. I don't like my thigh touching a stranger's thigh. But then again, I'm super weird when it comes to personal space and being touched, so maybe it's a me thing and not a seat thing.

If you ever visit here, I would suggest you avoid the New York subways at rush hour..........

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Even when I was thin, I still hated 17" seats. I don't like my thigh touching a stranger's thigh. But then again, I'm super weird when it comes to personal space and being touched, so maybe it's a me thing and not a seat thing.

I don't like sleeping against a stranger, but on Amtrak it's virtually impossible to avoid unless the train is empty, you're traveling in an even numbered group, or you're in a sleeper. Was it like that in the 50's or is sleeping with strangers some sort of thing that Amtrak pioneered?

 

[PRR 60]

Even when I was thin, I still hated 17" seats. I don't like my thigh touching a stranger's thigh. But then again, I'm super weird when it comes to personal space and being touched, so maybe it's a me thing and not a seat thing.

I don't like sleeping against a stranger, but on Amtrak it's virtually impossible to avoid unless the train is empty, you're traveling in an even numbered group, or you're in a sleeper. Was it like that in the 50's or is sleeping with strangers some sort of thing that Amtrak pioneered?

As I recall, the pre-Amtrak coach seating also lacked the arm rest between the seats. I took my first long distance train trip in 1963, and that is how I recall it. But, given that it was 50 years ago (yikes), I can't say for sure,

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Even when I was thin, I still hated 17" seats. I don't like my thigh touching a stranger's thigh. But then again, I'm super weird when it comes to personal space and being touched, so maybe it's a me thing and not a seat thing.

I don't like sleeping against a stranger, but on Amtrak it's virtually impossible to avoid unless the train is empty, you're traveling in an even numbered group, or you're in a sleeper. Was it like that in the 50's or is sleeping with strangers some sort of thing that Amtrak pioneered?

As I recall, the pre-Amtrak coach seating also lacked the arm rest between the seats. I took my first long distance train trip in 1963, and that is how I recall it. But, given that it was 50 years ago (yikes), I can't say for sure,

Here's a greatg interior pic of the old seats on the El Capitan: http://streamlinermemories.info/SF/Hilevelseats.jpg.

As you can see, there is a armrest between the seats but it matches into the seatback when you don't need it, so no gap between the seats.

 

[railiner]

Even when I was thin, I still hated 17" seats. I don't like my thigh touching a stranger's thigh. But then again, I'm super weird when it comes to personal space and being touched, so maybe it's a me thing and not a seat thing.

I don't like sleeping against a stranger, but on Amtrak it's virtually impossible to avoid unless the train is empty, you're traveling in an even numbered group, or you're in a sleeper. Was it like that in the 50's or is sleeping with strangers some sort of thing that Amtrak pioneered?

As I recall, the pre-Amtrak coach seating also lacked the arm rest between the seats. I took my first long distance train trip in 1963, and that is how I recall it. But, given that it was 50 years ago (yikes), I can't say for sure,

Here's a greatg interior pic of the old seats on the El Capitan: http://streamlinermemories.info/SF/Hilevelseats.jpg.

As you can see, there is a armrest between the seats but it matches into the seatback when you don't need it, so no gap between the seats.

Great photo! Thanks for the link.....those Hi-Level seats were made by Karpen....much more comfortable than anything out there today. And because they did not have tray tables, they reclined much further, as well. For those that "Vant to be alone".....the transition coach had some single coach seats on either side of the steps leading down to the standard level end door.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Even when I was thin, I still hated 17" seats. I don't like my thigh touching a stranger's thigh. But then again, I'm super weird when it comes to personal space and being touched, so maybe it's a me thing and not a seat thing.

I don't like sleeping against a stranger, but on Amtrak it's virtually impossible to avoid unless the train is empty, you're traveling in an even numbered group, or you're in a sleeper. Was it like that in the 50's or is sleeping with strangers some sort of thing that Amtrak pioneered?

As I recall, the pre-Amtrak coach seating also lacked the arm rest between the seats. I took my first long distance train trip in 1963, and that is how I recall it. But, given that it was 50 years ago (yikes), I can't say for sure,

Here's a greatg interior pic of the old seats on the El Capitan: http://streamlinermemories.info/SF/Hilevelseats.jpg.

As you can see, there is a armrest between the seats but it matches into the seatback when you don't need it, so no gap between the seats.

Great photo! Thanks for the link.....those Hi-Level seats were made by Karpen....much more comfortable than anything out there today. And because they did not have tray tables, they reclined much further, as well. For those that "Vant to be alone".....the transition coach had some single coach seats on either side of the steps leading down to the standard level end door.

Do you know the seat pitch on those things?

 

[railiner]

No, sorry...but probably similar to Superliner's......

 

[chakk]

Just read today that Emirates is gunning for 11 abreast on the main deck of the A380. Which is interesting since Airbus was trying to make a case for 18" seat width standard, and now their biggest customer is telling them to go screw their marketing needs. It was EK that became a big proponent of 10 abreast on 777s and many followed suit. Boeing originally positioned the 777 as a 9 abreast aircraft.

My trip-7 across the pond last Thursday from Germany to D.C. was still 9 abreast -- at least in the Economy Plus section. Reasonably comfortable, and, in Economy Plus plenty of legroom, too.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Just read today that Emirates is gunning for 11 abreast on the main deck of the A380. Which is interesting since Airbus was trying to make a case for 18" seat width standard, and now their biggest customer is telling them to go screw their marketing needs. It was EK that became a big proponent of 10 abreast on 777s and many followed suit. Boeing originally positioned the 777 as a 9 abreast aircraft.

My trip-7 across the pond last Thursday from Germany to D.C. was still 9 abreast -- at least in the Economy Plus section. Reasonably comfortable, and, in Economy Plus plenty of legroom, too.

Economy Plus? You must've been flying United. All United 777s are in 9-abreast, United and Delta don't have great service but at least they have no 10-abreast 777s. Air Canada is going for it though, squeezing 458 seats into a 777-300ER and American is also trying it out.

 

[jis]

Yeah, I was a bit puzzled about what having flown 9 abreast on United 777E had to do with Emirates or American doing 10 abreast on their 777Ws. BTW American has the equivalent of E+ on their 777Ws which is 9 abreast. Only the regular E is 10 abreast.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Yeah, I was a bit puzzled about what having flown 9 abreast on United 777E had to do with Emirates or American doing 10 abreast on their 777Ws. BTW American has the equivalent of E+ on their 777Ws which is 9 abreast. Only the regular E is 10 abreast.

AA's Main Cabin Extra seems a bit better than Economy Plus, the former boasting 36" of pitch compared to 34" on the latter. But Main Cabin Extra is not offered on the 777-200ER which is a major problem for loung-haul Economy flyers.

 

[xyzzy]

Indications in the last two weeks are that AA is already beginning to back away from domestic MCE. Also, MCE on the international flights isn't really the same as E+ because AA does not consider MCE a 4th cabin. On their partner BA, WT+ is ticketed as a fourth cabin and you don't have people from the rear contending for those seats.

The AA 772's will be reconfigured next year: F removed, new C seats, MCE 3-3-3, and Y 3-4-3. Suck it up, Y travelers who don't have Advantage status.

 

[jis]

Does United really consider E+ to be a fourth cabin?

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Indications in the last two weeks are that AA is already beginning to back away from domestic MCE. Also, MCE on the international flights isn't really the same as E+ because AA does not consider MCE a 4th cabin. On their partner BA, WT+ is ticketed as a fourth cabin and you don't have people from the rear contending for those seats.

The AA 772's will be reconfigured next year: F removed, new C seats, MCE 3-3-3, and Y 3-4-3. Suck it up, Y travelers who don't have Advantage status.

If I book a Y ticket on an old AA 777 next year, can't I just pay for an upgrade to MCE? When is MCE going to be completed on the old 777s?

Does United really consider E+ to be a fourth cabin?

I don't think so, I mean, they have the same seats and service, the only difference is more legroom.

 

[xyzzy]

AA hasn't yet announced a specific schedule for 772 reconfig. It's your roll of the dice. Yes you can pay extra for MCE on the aircraft that have it, although you've got a lot of Advantage elite status holders to contend with.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

AA hasn't yet announced a specific schedule for 772 reconfig. It's your roll of the dice. Yes you can pay extra for MCE on the aircraft that have it, although you've got a lot of Advantage elite status holders to contend with.

But if you book early, you can get it before the elites get it, and a lot of elites fly Business anyway. I failed to get elite status on any airline because I keep flying different airlines.

 

[xyzzy]

Subject to how many MCE seats AA releases that early, yes. But there are a lot of elites whose employers don't permit transatlantic C. I work for one. I think you'll find that close to departure time, the competition for transatlantic MCE is very keen. If you're not Platinum or Executive Platinum, don't bother.

 

[chakk]

Indications in the last two weeks are that AA is already beginning to back away from domestic MCE. Also, MCE on the international flights isn't really the same as E+ because AA does not consider MCE a 4th cabin. On their partner BA, WT+ is ticketed as a fourth cabin and you don't have people from the rear contending for those seats.

The AA 772's will be reconfigured next year: F removed, new C seats, MCE 3-3-3, and Y 3-4-3. Suck it up, Y travelers who don't have Advantage status.

If I book a Y ticket on an old AA 777 next year, can't I just pay for an upgrade to MCE? When is MCE going to be completed on the old 777s?

Does United really consider E+ to be a fourth cabin?

I don't think so, I mean, they have the same seats and service, the only difference is more legroom.

However, passengers who are not "qualified" to sit in United E+ can purchase seats in that section. Not sure if United will automatically seat Economy passengers on an oversold Economy section into E+. On my recent trip on a United 757, the E passengers were kindly advised not to walk forward to use the toilet facilities in the E+ section.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

If I'm flying AA next year, which I might, then I would definately book MCE instead of risking to fly on a 10-abreast 777. If I can't book MCe, I will just fly some other airline, I'll probably try out NH.