San Gottardo

Can someone explain me what the problem is? Air France lacks the money? They haven't found a technical solution (in which case, just put in the same seats as QR)? Supplier delays?

orbitmic

I think that's the one (the will is also dubious)

Goldorak

I think money is the main reason. But it seems they really have a specific "technical" problem with the retrofit of the A380, which I don't fully understand.

San Gottardo

Neither do I. Just take the BEST seats. They are very similar to what QR has installed on its A380, so there can't be a problem of that seat not fitting on an A380.

Goldorak

No, they can't use the same BEST seat as in the B777 as they cannot fit this one as 1-2-1 at the upper deck (too narrow fuselage), so they need to use a modified version.

orbitmic

The BEST seats are not the same as the QR ones. BEST uses the Zodiac Cirrus seat (same as CX, UL, AA on the 77W, etc and a newer version of which is used on AY's new 359s), whilst QR uses the BEA Super Diamond seat (same as AA on the A321T for instance). The two seats may "feel" quite similar in looks but they are actually quite different notably in terms of angle and floorspace (I personally prefer the Cirrus).

That said, I don't believe much in the technical story unless it is a more cunning one (like AF want a still that will also permit the infamous "quickchange" on their 380s!)

brunos

Your comments about a technical problem had puzzled me, so I conducted an investigation with a very-knowledgeable friend in the seat business.

Each Cirrus seat (or other) has to be modified from one type of ac to another. Even the AF 777 version is a light-weight version of Cirrus (quite different actually) and needed serious modification and certification. Zodiac has installed modified Cirrus versions on B777, A330, A350 and B787. Meeting certification and airline requirements was not easy and explain severe delays on A350.
The upper cabin width of A380 is 5.8m and is larger than A330 (5.3), A350 (5.6) and B787 (5.5). Whatever some poster wrote somewhere (airliners.net), the A380 cabin width is not the problem. And as many mentioned, QR installed the more spacious B/E seat.

My guess is that there are three potential explanations:
1) cash needs

2) AF does its retrofit very slowly, to the tune of one plane per month. Probably to minimize impact on flight schedule and cash drain. It will finish 44 777s by mid-2017, then start on its huge fleet of A330. Not surprising that they wait for the A380 until 2019 or 2020.

3) AF would prefer to get consistency with a modified version of the Cirrus seat. But Zodiac has so many problems with modifications for the other ac, that there is no way that it could prepare a modified version for the A380 before quite a few years.

In any case, this is pathetic. Like Orbitmic, I won't fly AF until I am guaranteed a flat bed like on other airlines.

PS: Early September, Zodiac issued its ninth profit warning in two years. Hard to think of any other companies doing it. At least, they now have certification on the A350 seats and can resume deliveries, but way beyond schedule as CX painfully know.

Goldorak

Thank you for those precisions and your investigation.

sscaf001

As I could see recently thanks to Amadeus, some 772 will get only 28 seats in J instead of 40, all the year round. 772 with 312 seats in total.

brunos

That is news to me.
All 772 were supposed to be 40J/16J quickchange.
If that's true, they are introducing a new config by removing the second J cabin of the full config (40J). So they remove 12J seats after the galley and replace them by 32Y.

NickB

This is massively OT and I hope that Goldorak won't mind my engaging in a touch of pedantic correction on his otherwise excellent English but "precision" can be something of a faux-ami. In English, "precision" is, to my knowledge, only used in the sense of exactness and accuracy (i.e. the quality of being precise) and not in the other French sense of clarification or detail (i.e. information that you might provide when you are being precise). It is therefore normally an uncountable noun and not used in the plural. Similarly, the nearest equivalent of "préciser" would probably be "to clarify" in most circumstances or perhaps "to specify"/"to be (more) specific" or something like "to provide more details" in others and there is no verb derived from precise or precision in English (i.e. "to precise" does not exist, at any rate not in this sense).

Anyway, apologies for this linguistic diversion and normal service may now resume.

orbitmic

you make me feel better because that was exactly my thought (in part because I often make the same mistake myself) when I read our friend's Goldorak thanks note to brunos, which I incidentally fully echo! So yes, I guess it would have to be 'clarification' or 'additional information/data', although I suspect it also means you and I have spent too much time in English-speaking countries!!

Goldorak

I certainly don't mind and thank you for correcting my mistakes in English

BenSDQ

I was also holding my breath for my recent US flight I took but it seems the 777 conversions are also way behind schedule. A flight booked for mid-november also gets me the awful old seat as of today. I am however keeping my fingers crossed they will roll out BOS as one of the cities to get the new business (though I believe that is unlikely due to the short flight time).

brunos

These native English guys really like pedantic precision. Very poor form to redress our wonderful leader Goldorak .
I guess that Goldorak should have thanked me for "the precision of the investigation". BTW, my friend included centimeters in the measures of cabin width but I felt is was becoming over-precise.

The AF forum has become much more humorous lately, with traces of wonderful British sense of humour, and that is fun.