BA reveals 10 abreast 777
 

https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2018/03/0...-seat-in-each/

I'd love to be a fly on the wall on the evac tests with 25% of pax grabbing hand luggage. I am assuming there will be some "cork in the bottle" tests?

Actually no, maybe because the British are so unfailingly polite this isn't a problem. "After you old chap" "no, you first, I insist" "I say, thanks ever so" :}

Pinkman I know we are leaving the EU and imposing tough controls on immigration to limit those terrible foreigners from entering our country, but I don't think we can afford for BA to limit itself to only carrying unfailingly polite Brits!!

I would also question how many decades ago it was when you last travelled on a holiday route with BA or any other British airline, because unfailingly polite is something very few Brits are these days.

10 abreast ............ perhaps it will be called the Samantha Fox cabin?

Why would there be a need for tests?

The B772 is certificated for over 100 pax more than BA's 10-abreast configuration.

There's nothing new about 10-abreast in a 777.
Certain sandy airlines have had it for years.

777 certification test
 

Dave, you are right but that is the problem. Its certificated.

All:

1. Watch this 777 evac certification test.


2. Count the number of pax with hand baggage.

3. Reflect on the holiday destinations that this high density configuration is designed to serve from EGKK.

4. Think about the type of people that will use economy class and how often they travel in an aircraft on average (most once or twice a year), and the fact that they tend to take max hand baggage.

Pinkman

Then this a Boeing/ regulators problem, not BA's.

Despite all the " your safety..." platitudes your hear and read I doubt any airline CFO or CEO on the planet is going to turn round to the rest of the Board and/or the shareholders and say, "yes, we had the option to make more money by legally installing more seats, but we can't trust the passengers not to take their wheelies with them in an evacuation, so we decided not to do so"....

..and has been pointed out there are several airlines around, some operating into and out of the UK, carrying British passengers, in economy, with ten abreast seating.

Glad BA continues with it's determined quest to becoming just another LOCO. Glad because my limited staff travel facility with former employer has just expired and I have to go with the loco's like everyone else. Recent Paphos/Glasgow with Jet2 was pure delight & the cabin crew were prettier than BA. And that was only the stewards.

10-abreast 777s is the standard these days, and have been so for quite a few years already; one could well argue BA are just late hitching on the bandwagon.

What an odd OP.

EASA type certification for the 777

https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/def...1215_Final.pdf

Do you consider Emirates to be a Loco? They've had 10 abreast seating on their 777s for ages.

Haven't they also just announced ' Cheaper fares for hand baggage only ' on Long Haul too ?

Or ' Pay for checked baggage ' as many others would see it.

Edited to add BA, that is.....

YES!
(tried them once, never again...)

Gordomac

Please check your use of the apostrophe in your diatribe.

Sorry to hear you have lost your GF staff travel. Guess you will have to sit a little more by that lovely pool instead.:D

NAS longhaul must be hurting BA;

BA to launch no-frills fares for transatlantic flights | Daily Mail Online

(The BA L1011's where 10 abreast!)

I suspect the plan is to do exact opposite....

I suggest a Gulfstream V if you're not happy with all of the above.
Then again, I tried it once, never again...

Not nearly as much as it’s hurting Norwegian.

This is a slight misrepresentation. The ME airlines (one in particular) that first went from 9 to 10 across in a 777 did so with 35" seat pitch. Their rationale was that the same cabin space per pax was better appreciated with length rather than width.


Other carriers then leapt at the 10-across seating units, but did nothing about the pitch side of the equation.

Not since the LoCos were invented, certainly.

I'd be more aggrieved at the 180Y A320. That's just matching up with EZY. I do admit that I try and avoid BAW where possible and would happily book EZY at their expense.

Do any airlines do 174Y or less A320 any more? Also don't like it when airlines are fitting the MCD and lucky economy passengers are getting a business pitch, despite paying an economy price.