Pathetic seats on SAA
 

Last Monday I flew economy class on SAA's 747-400 (ZS-SAY).

I flew in it from Johannesburg to Cape Town . Thank goodness it was only a 2 hour flight!!
I have NEVER experienced such little leg space on any other airline in the world!!
How people can fly to London and the USA in that aircraft is just mind boggling!!
In fact, I think its close to criminal to sell someone a seat like that!!
If the person in front of you reclines just a bit, one can not even read a magazine in the little space between the two seats!
I flew back on a 737-800, and that little aeroplane had MORE legroom than the 747-400!!

I can now understand why SAA is making such huge losses, because I shall NEVER fly with them overseas!

Come on SAA, send some of your management (that never fly economy) to go and feel what it feels like to sit in economy class on the 747-400, ZA-SAY !!!

Long haul in economy has always sucked. I doubt it's a SAA thing, having flown a number of airlines between Europe and Southern Africa. And yes, there is generally more leg space in the 738 as opposed to the 747 (economy). That's why after 12 hrs all the economy passengers look longingly at the seating arrangements in business as they exit. Even the budget airlines 737's have more space. Try flying longhaul with one of the holiday airlines, then there's even less space.
I wouldn't moan about it this way, and you can always vote with your wallet.

I think the worst leg room of any British airline has to be that on My Travels 763's. Me and the better half flew to the Dominican Republic on one. The seat pitch couldnt have been more than 28" with 1" of recline. Sitting bolt upright for nearly 9 hours wasnt funny and I have vowed never to fly long haul using a charter airline.

A few years ago we visited family in New Zealand and chose to fly via SFO. We flew BA to SFO and Air New Zealand to Auckland. BA world traveler had about 32" seat pitch where as Air NZ had about 35".

Seems to be the luck of the draw depending on Carrier, Distance and Aircraft. I did a Continental 757 from Cleveland to London and was packed in, conversley I did a Continental 777 London to Houston and it was very pleasant.

I did economy on LHR - CPT last year in one of their old 747-200's.

Yes it was pretty awful.

Many years ago I did CPT-JHB on a SAA 747-200 - I was the only pax along with the crew, and a relief crew. Very comfortable- don't know what you're talking about! :)

As far as I can see, SAA seat pitch in Y is 31", same as BA and possibly more than VS. And the same as airlines like QF although they fly elsewhere from South Africa.

Most of the discomfort that people feel is psychological, not physical. If you do it enough, you learn how to make use of the space you have. I get buckets of sleep between Sydney and London in such seats.

Globaliser writes:"Most of the discomfort that people feel is psychological, not physical. If you do it enough, you learn how to make use of the space you have. I get buckets of sleep between Sydney and London in such seats."

I dont think its my inmagination that makes my knees hit the seat in front. As to the pitch you may be correct as they all seem not to go back far. "Buckets of Sleep"...Are you Six foot or over??

Seat Guru states that:
BA 744: World Traveler: 31.0" pitch 17.5" width
VS LHR based 744: Economy Class: 32.0" pitch 17.5" width

They do not list SAA so I checked SAA direct and they state that the 744 (main deck) is 31.0" (width not given)

WesternAir confirm the SAA 744 pitch at 31" They also mention that the seat width of the 340-600 is 17.1"

--------------------
"I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you any different." Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.

No, I agree that's a physical limit and I didn't say all. But the intensely anxious stress-filled fidgeting that many infrequent long-haul pax seem to suffer from is much more psychological than physical. It's also a very large part of what stops people from sleeping.

I'm not quite 6 foot - a little over 5'11". But on average I will get 13-14 hours' sleep between London and Sydney (in an economy class seat) and I did once manage 18 - although the penalty for that was that I was very hungry by the time I got off the plane in Sydney. It helps that I have been doing this sort of flying regularly since I was 12 - well over a quarter of a century ago.

The SAA Airbus A340 seats are the worst. I see that the manufacturer of those seats is Recaro. I hope Recaro don't go into the seat business because they know nothing about the human body, and they make really bad seats. I wonder if anyone from SAA ever sat in the seats before they brought them, or did Recaro just offer the biggest ahem commission discount bonus ex-gratia brown paper bag. And recouped the cost by leaving out the ergonomics from design of the seat. At least they got the bit right about the seats needing to cater for all sizes of passenger. The seats are very uncomfortable for all people from 5'6" to 6'6"

If there was truly justice in this world, SAA management should be condemned to fly in their own aircraft and sit in their own seats. There, that is REAL punishment. And the thing is that they will get punished whether they sit in business class in the A340-200 or in economy in any of the A340s. They are all Recaro seats (excepting the business sleeper seat in the A340-600 is pretty good).

Recaro are a very prestigious seat manufacturer (Porsche etc etc) - see Recaro (englisch). I can't comment on the comfort of SAA's 340, as it's been quite a while since I flew with them, but I bet they paid a considerable sum to get the Recaro name on the seats (of course, they may have wasted their money :D)

Recaro make a goodly proportion of the world's airline seats, including some very comfortable ones like the BA WT+ seat. Whether a particular seat is comfortable or not depends a great deal on your individual dimensions and how you fit into it: I've noticed that I fit better into a Qantas economy seat than a BA economy seat, which then forms a large part of my choice between them when there is one.

Umm actually I was being sarcastic about Recaro not being in the seat business. I know they have been there for a long time making hard racing car seats (amongst others). But I still wish they hadn't gone into the airline seat business.

What surprised me was not that I was uncomfortable (which could just be my own frame and body, and thus my own problem), but that many other people of very different frames and dimensions to me have said the same thing about the uncomfortable SAA seats. And the SAA Recaros stand out amongst the many airlines I travel on for the uncomfortableness of the seats.

IMHO if the seat purchase was uninfluenced by other considerations (heh heh) then it must come back to the management trap of believing the 'brand-name' and not doing something constructive like actually testing the seats before they get ordered.

Virgin to Cape Town
 

I flew To Cape Town last year and found my middle seat adequately comfortable and as spacious as we cattle can expect. My husband was in the window seat and arrived with a significant pain in the leg, having suffered the entertainment box taking up half his foot-space.

Who designs THAT sort of feature? We thought it was an isolated case - SA not being a prime destination - but then encountered the same problem on the flight to IAD this year.

In principle, I much prefer the Airbus 2-seat layout to the 747 3-seat; there are two of us and it's nicer not to share or little fragment of space with a stranger. but that dam' box ruins it and I will be very reluctant to set foot on another Airbus until they get that "little" detail sorted.

Quite. And more to the point, when can we ask to be seated in the no-TV section of the aircraft. Those bl**dy boxes are more trouble than they're worth, and get in the way of a good night's kip. (And yes, I am serious.)