No issue on BA shorthaul. Pitch in club is the same as in economy.

Air Canada has had 10 abreast 777s for several years. They were introduced as being for “short” routes i.e. Toronto and Montreal to Europe. Of course that didn’t last and now they are used on the Pacific routes as well.

398 Y seats. Known as Slave Ships by the CC.

Won't help with the current generation 777, but on the 777X they are reconfiguring the fuselage structure to get ~6 more inches at the seats. Should make 10 abreast a little more tolerable.

Is that not just to get 11 across configured 3-5-3; a further 1" off every seat plus the extra 6" will fit another 16" wide seat.

The intent is to make 10 abreast more tolerable. What the airlines do with it is up to them.

If the sheep stopped shopping only by price and started looking at value, maybe the airlines would stop cramming more and more seats in... As it stands now, I suspect many people would buy a standing room only seat on a long haul flight if it saved them $20 airfare (and of course the regulators allowed it).

I fly several times per year ORD-CGK and back connecting in NRT and generally choose a t7 10 abreast over a certain Japanese carrier with a 787. Less room in the t7 but much more padding in the seats.
As much as it sucks, the 10 abreast t7 is a better option than the jap 787.

So another 50+ seats in a 320 on a medium haul route. No thanks

To add fuel to the fire......

British Airways plans to shrink seats for long-haul flyers | Daily Mail Online

I've yet to see a flight booking system that allows you to compare flights by amenities/comfort level. It'd be nice if you could "sort by seat pitch" but I don't see that in the immediate future :)

Besides, for most punters the preference is generally the direct flight, no matter what airline offers it. Where I live there's zero competition on the vast majority of routes.

All been done before by BA at LGW:

https://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-58663.html

Why do people on here think that the public will ever shop by comfort over price? Price has become the prime factor for the majority in most purchases. The need to get a bargain supersedes all other considerations for many.

If people on here genuinely pay a higher fare to travel with more comfort then fair play to them, but most airline associated staff I have worked with have been very happy to save money at every opportunity, so they are no different to those travelling with the Locos.

Look at the fleet sizes of the Locos and realise that they must be doing something right!

10 abreast on a 777, 3-4-3, looks acceptable in the promo photo. It could be argued that the block of 4 seats is preferable to the block of 3 seats as you only have one person to disturb if moving from the non aisle seat as opposed to two from the window seat.

For people who fly only once or twice a year, price is everything. Those people who either fly more frequently, especally on the same route, or are interested in aviation, know there is more to it.

I have the choice of a direct EZY flight twice a week or a change in Europe several times a day, on a variety of airlines. When searching I discount the trips which take more than say nine hours as the direct flight is about five hours, and prefer to fly with Swiss which has larger planes, more space and IFE. The alternatives are legacy airlines whose planes are no more luxurious than EZY. But if Swiss is £600 each and the others are £350 it's a no brainer and if the EZY flight is £400 direct and the others £350 it is also obvious I use EZY.

However, if I need to fly on a day when there is no EZY flight, the choice is balance between trip time, price and comfort. I have in past spent about £20 more simply to arrive at 23:00 rather than 03:30 the next morning.

What hasn't been mentioned, at least on this thread, is that despite the number of pax being increased significantly, the number of restrooms remains the same. I pity the poor souls sitting in the vicinity of the toilets, being disturbed by a constant stream [sic] of passengers during the flight.
I know that economically it makes no sense, but it would have been nice, if, just for once, BA had thought of their customers, and taken one row of seats out, and added two extra loos. However, until Mr Cruz flies in economy in the row immediately in front of the washrooms, on a 12 hour flight to Mauritius, this is never going to happen.

I believe you've divined their intent. :ugh:

I flew BA 777 3-4-3 to Cancun in 2001. IIRC there was an under-seat IFE box further adding to the general claustrophobia. Not nice at all.

https://www.seatguru.com/
Yes, it means that you need to go to a second website to research the amenities and comfort level, but I seldom book a flight without checking it.

Crewman

Air 2000/First Choice flew 218 seat A321's for years. Of these, the front 4 rows were premium, so a balanced 218 of economy should be fine.

Slight thread creep I admit, but the question of comfort & value for money was raised, rather than hammer cattle class even more.

There have been a few attempts at business class only seats airlines. They've failed. The routes are limited and the a/c needs filling.

However, there are now many travellers, of all ages, but many retired, who have spare cash and are travelling to exotic locations for luxury holidays. They want the comfort of the trip to be part of total experience. But, the difference between business & economy on these routes is huge; sometimes x4. The difference buys a whole lot of upgraded accommodation, or even 2 weeks longer holiday. OK, you can try Premium economy, the difference is worth it for the price paid, but there are limited seats. There are often no direct flights.
There are many exclusive holiday destinations where the only direct flight are charter, some with club class, or a national carrier with a stop over, or change over, costing a lot of time.

IMHO there is a niche for clever marketing between exclusive holiday companies and an airline that offers an all 'premium economy' 'club class' cabin. They would fly direct to the sunshine destinations. The holidays would be seasonal to account for monsoons, hurricanes and other weather features, and change from north to south also on a seasonal basis.

If I want to fly to Phuket, Mombasa, Grenada, Vietnam, Kho So Mui, Maldives etc. etc. to a 5* resort, I would like to fly in comfort, direct at a reasonable price. A wide body 2-3-2 with old style semi-flat reclining seats, and enough leg room to step over would be nice.

There are older B767, A330, B777 that might suit. Single type essential. You'd need 15-16 hour range to cover various departure countries, but the payload would be lighter than normal. It could be 'pan' operation based in various countries à la TUI. I'm sure there is enough money in Scandinavia, Germany, UK, Luxembourg, Switzerland, and others to develop such market.

When I flew B757 we had 213 instead of the UK norm of 238. The pax loved it, especially on the Caribbean. Price were comparable to cattle class and we were always full. Value for money as someone suggested.

Is your airline that operated the 757 with 213Y still in business?

Airports such as Koh Samui can't handle anything larger than an A319!