PDA

View Full Version : Delta 777 9 abreast


Foxdeux
3rd Jul 2018, 20:52
https://www.chron.com/chris-mcginnis/article/First-look-Delta-s-overhauled-777-200-fleet-13045598.php#photo-15815198

Seems like Delta is killing it with their new business class suites, A350, and now retrofitting their 777's with 9 abreast seating in economy. MAGA!

Noxegon
3rd Jul 2018, 21:38
I wish EK would that with their 777s...

SeenItAll
4th Jul 2018, 02:03
While still good news for Y pax, Delta only has 18 777s. So not much of its fleet. Further, its 350s are also 9 abreast -- so not great in comfort.

Foxdeux
4th Jul 2018, 02:35
While still good news for Y pax, Delta only has 18 777s. So not much of its fleet. Further, its 350s are also 9 abreast -- so not great in comfort.

You're right but 9 abreast on the A350 is what Airbus built it to be, when the 777 came out it was supposed to be 9 abreast but airlines got greedy and wanted high capacity so 10 abreast it went. When you fly on a 777 10 abreast you know immediately that the plane wasn't designed for that capacity. I haven't flown on an A350 yet but from what i've read the 9 abreast is wide enough, compared to the 787 9 abreast (a plane that was designed to be 8 abreast).

WHBM
4th Jul 2018, 10:50
As I understand it, Emirates was the first with 10-across in the 777, but with increased seat pitch (35" ?), so the overall seats per square foot remained the same. Other operators then introduced the same width, saying "same as Emirates". but with their existing lesser pitch.

The 777X is having a substantial re-engineering of the cabin walls and insulation to reduce their thickness (this on an aircraft already well known for being the noisiest in cruise). Airlines seem happy now with 10-across, so the only reason they can be doing this, which apparently gives another 6" cabin width, is to shave another inch of all the seats again, as well, and go for 3-5-3 11-across.

Lord Bracken
4th Jul 2018, 10:57
An A350 with 9 abreast has 18" seats. 3-4-3 on a 777 is closer to 16.5".

GrahamO
4th Jul 2018, 12:21
this on an aircraft already well known for being the noisiest in cruise

Interesting, I never knew that. How well did it fare 'in the day' rather than when compared with more modern aircraft out of interest ?

WHBM
4th Jul 2018, 14:16
I was recently in Premium Economy on Cathay Pacific, 8-across, and that was still feeling constricted. Not as bad (or as noisy) as those further back, but really makes you feel we are already at the bottom.

Footroom already half gone due to the IFE box for the seat unit ahead getting there first, and having the tray table come out from a housing between seats rather than a drop-down from the seatback ahead knocks another inch off actual seat width.

Interesting, I never knew that. How well did it fare 'in the day' rather than when compared with more modern aircraft out of interest ? 777 was initially contemporary with the A330/340, which if you did two sectors, first the 777 and then the Airbus, made it very evident just how quiet the Toulouse product was. I recall there was actually Airbus advertising in the 1990s on this very point.

I've pondered before just why the 777 is so noisy, especially aft of the wing. Engine noise or air conditioning ? Are the engines set further inboard than the A330 ? If it's lesser insulation, moves on the 777X to reduce this further are lamentable.

NWSRG
4th Jul 2018, 15:04
Surely Delta doing this is good news...could it be a sign that the race to the bottom is coming to an end? My most comfortable economy flight was on an Air Canada 77L, when they were 9 abreast. We were forward of the engines from memory, and it was a very relaxed journey.

I for one would pay a little extra if I was assured of flying on a 9 abreast (rather than 10) 777, or an 8 abreast (rather than 9) 787.

As for the Airbii being quieter, my gut feeling is that seat location is as relevant a factor as aircraft type. I'd take a Boeing seat forward of the engines before an Airbus seat aft!

Tay Cough
4th Jul 2018, 15:19
Just in time for BA to go ten abreast on some of their 777s.

tdracer
4th Jul 2018, 20:30
The 777X is having a substantial re-engineering of the cabin walls and insulation to reduce their thickness (this on an aircraft already well known for being the noisiest in cruise). Airlines seem happy now with 10-across, so the only reason they can be doing this, which apparently gives another 6" cabin width, is to shave another inch of all the seats again, as well, and go for 3-5-3 11-across.
The 777 was designed for 9 abreast, provisioned for 10 (similarly the 767 was designed for 7, provisioned for 8 - the difference being very few operators used the 8 abreast).
The 777X is not being provisioned for 11 abreast so there is little chance that will happen, but 10 will be more comfortable.

I've pondered before just why the 777 is so noisy, especially aft of the wing. Engine noise or air conditioning ? Are the engines set further inboard than the A330 ? If it's lesser insulation, moves on the 777X to reduce this further are lamentable.
It's mainly ECS - I've even heard Boeing test pilots comment on how much quieter the Airbus ECS is compared to Boeing and wondered how they did it.
Hopefully the ECS noise is being addressed on the 777X.

Foxdeux
4th Jul 2018, 21:04
The 777 was designed for 9 abreast, provisioned for 10 (similarly the 767 was designed for 7, provisioned for 8 - the difference being very few operators used the 8 abreast).
The 777X is not being provisioned for 11 abreast so there is little chance that will happen, but 10 will be more comfortable.


It's mainly ECS - I've even heard Boeing test pilots comment on how much quieter the Airbus ECS is compared to Boeing and wondered how they did it.
Hopefully the ECS noise is being addressed on the 777X.

I always thought it was because of the GE90's. Kind of bad on Boeing to make such an awesome aircraft but to have the ECS ruin the experience.

WHBM
4th Jul 2018, 21:46
It's mainly ECS - I've even heard Boeing test pilots comment on how much quieter the Airbus ECS is compared to Boeing and wondered how they did it.
Hopefully the ECS noise is being addressed on the 777X.
If this is so, then the solutions are basic and well known from ground installations. Ductwork of optimum size for the airflow. No sharp corners or square sections in the ductwork. Fans with assymetric blades to reduce harmonic noise. It's all stuff that Boeing must surely be aware of, and it's been an issue since the 777 first came along.

tdracer
4th Jul 2018, 22:20
I always thought it was because of the GE90's. Kind of bad on Boeing to make such an awesome aircraft but to have the ECS ruin the experience.

Nah, it's not the GE90's - the PW40xx and Trent 900 777's are just as bad (before the GE90-115B was introduced on the 777-300ER/200LR, the 777 fleet was roughly evenly split between the Rolls, Pratt, and GE engines - it's since the introduction of the GE90-115B that GE has had nearly 100% market share). I think ECS noise simply wasn't a priority during the 777 development - they didn't think that the 'white noise' of ECS was that objectionable. It was the super quiet A380 that really brought the subject to the forefront.

msbbarratt
4th Jul 2018, 22:52
You're right but 9 abreast on the A350 is what Airbus built it to be, when the 777 came out it was supposed to be 9 abreast but airlines got greedy and wanted high capacity so 10 abreast it went. When you fly on a 777 10 abreast you know immediately that the plane wasn't designed for that capacity. I haven't flown on an A350 yet but from what i've read the 9 abreast is wide enough, compared to the 787 9 abreast (a plane that was designed to be 8 abreast).

I can report that the A350 is both quiet and comfortable, at 9 across. Not as good as an A380 though. An Emirates A380 with RR engines (the only one I've tried, sure the GE one is just as good) is a thing to behold.

The 777x needs to be significantly quieter than the classic if it's going to challenge the Airbus airliners. With thinner walls it's going to require some pretty exotic sound insulation, = heavy.

I'd heard that the sound insulation on 787 was optional, and has never been ordered. The demo aircraft originally shown off to the aviation press did have it...

Despite not liking the 777, it's encouraging to see a US airline give a thought for passenger comfort. Delta are buying C series too, which is also comfortable according to many accounts.

If Delta start picking up market share by being a little bit nicer to their passengers than the others, that idea might become the new vogue. So if demand for more comfortable aircraft picks up , who is selling those at the moment, and more pertinently who is not? A320/C Series vs 737? A350 vs 787/777x (at 9 and 10 across)? A380 vs nothing?

Volume
5th Jul 2018, 07:48
this on an aircraft already well known for being the noisiest in cruise
Interesting, I never knew that.
I always felt that way, but did not know that this is "officially" well known.
Any reliable source ?
Compared to the A350, which has a remarkable quiet cabin, Boeing is facing a real challenge for the 777X !

which apparently gives another 6" cabin width
I think it is 4", "to provide the same comfort level as the 787 9 abreast" (which in fact is very poor)

it's encouraging to see a US airline give a thought for passenger comfort.
I indeed is. Lets hope others will follow this, and the next competition on the market will be about (reasonable) comfort, instead of low fares...
I am afraid it will be the opposite, and the 3-4-3 A350 and 777 as well as the 3-5-3 A380 and 777X will become the standard.

On the other hand, given a fixed passenger load, I would probably prefer a 3-5-3 configuration with an empty middle seat at my side, compared to a 3-4-3 with an occupied one at my side...

WHBM
5th Jul 2018, 09:54
they didn't think that the 'white noise' of ECS was that objectionable. It was the super quiet A380 that really brought the subject to the forefront.
I (and others) were noticing this comparison back in the 1990s, when the 777 and the A330/340 were both coming into service together. This was the decade before the A380 introduction.

I would have thought that if Boeing had fundamentally redone the air con for the 777X they would have mentioned it extensively, just like they have announced the cabin wall insulation reduction. But nothing.

cooperplace
5th Jul 2018, 10:41
I wish there was more discussion about noise levels, for me it's one of the worst things (along with narrow seats) about modern air travel. I flew on 738s yesterday for 6 hrs and they're noisy, not as noisy as a 747, worse than a 777, IMHO. But A380 and then A350 are way quieter, to my ears.
This is in economy.

Lord Bracken
5th Jul 2018, 10:47
Row 1 on a nearly new A330 is an extraordinarily quiet place to be, far quieter than even the A340-300.

stilton
5th Jul 2018, 11:58
I rather like the Boeing roar when Im in the back

Drowns our babies and other noisy types and puts me to sleep

Capn Bloggs
5th Jul 2018, 12:15
"out", I hope!! :ouch:

core_dump
5th Jul 2018, 12:21
"out", I hope!! :ouch:
I like it better the way he typed it. American legacy carriers need to do something to add value to their service, and I think he's on to something there.

Foxdeux
5th Jul 2018, 14:43
I like it better the way he typed it. American legacy carriers need to do something to add value to their service, and I think he's on to something there.

Savage. You were once a baby too.

Volume
5th Jul 2018, 15:53
Row 1 on a nearly new A330 is an extraordinarily quiet place to be, far quieter than even the A340-300.
I always felt that the A340 is louder than the A330 in the forward fuselage (business class) but more quiet aft of the wing.
Probably the larger diameter Fan of the A330 is significantly quieter, while the stronger jet is louder. Both are quite loud directly behind the wing during climb, once in cruise this fades away a bit. Seems mach number related.

777 is very loud at the forward wing root with the slats deployed. Also row 1 seems to be quite loud (supersonic airflow around the upper nose section with relatively thin skin), never found that on the Airbusses.
Some elements of the ECS are extremely loud as well, there are some internal circulation fans mainly running on ground in the forward cabin which are loud like hell.

Babies are indeed an issue in the A380, you hear them all through the aircraft. And in economy with the cheap headsets you can follow the soundtrack of 8 movies around you... A certain noise level is not that bad.

Peter47
6th Jul 2018, 11:28
Babies are indeed an issue in the A380, you hear them all through the aircraft. And in economy with the cheap headsets you can follow the soundtrack of 8 movies around you... A certain noise level is not that bad.

Very much agree. I'm told that BA artificially add noise to their A380s for that reason.

llondel
6th Jul 2018, 21:21
Savage. You were once a baby too.

I never cried on an aircraft though.

blaggerman
9th Jul 2018, 22:34
Seems like Delta is killing it with their new business class suites, A350, and now retrofitting their 777's with 9 abreast seating in economy. MAGA!What's the cause for excitement? Delta has always had 9 abreast on its 777s.

Volume
10th Jul 2018, 07:50
What's the cause for excitement?
Today most people get excited over bad news...
This time it is good news that Delta will not follow the trend to have 10 abreast on their 777 for their new cabin, but to stay with the 9 abreast Boeing initially has designed the 777 for.
If you believe in seatguru, the Delta economy seats on the 777 now have the same width as the Emirates business seats on the A380: 18.5 inch.

Only the shareholders / business analysts are probably not that happy that Delta is going for conventional comfort, not for higher profit.

msbbarratt
10th Jul 2018, 22:37
Today most people get excited over bad news...

This time it is good news that Delta will not follow the trend to have 10 abreast on their 777 for their new cabin, but to stay with the 9 abreast Boeing initially has designed the 777 for.

If you believe in seatguru, the Delta economy seats on the 777 now have the same width as the Emirates business seats on the A380: 18.5 inch.

Only the shareholders / business analysts are probably not that happy that Delta is going for conventional comfort, not for higher profit.

The shareholders will be happy if the business performs adequately. They will be delighted if the company does better than adequately. If Delta's load factors don't warrant having 10 across, there's no point adding all those pointless heavy seats if they're to remain empty. May as well encourage passenger loyalty instead; a tiny little touch of premium-ness goes a long way.