Go Back   FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Air New Zealand | Air Points
Sign in using an external account

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 22, 13, 1:33 pm   #31
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Programs: NZ Elite, BA Silver, BD Silver, QF Bronze, AF Ivory, FlyBe, ANA
Posts: 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gasfoodlodging View Post
O.k, time to thrash this topic even more + some...

I am 6'1", med build...and am having a tough time of choosing PE across to the US.

Via SFO, I get old school PE with 'lotsa' recline, but a row of three and tired seats (and chance of upper deck which would be a novelty).

Via LAX I get new school PE, bit more privacy, but I am unsure of comfort.

What are the new PE seats like for someone with long legs and a preference for reclining/ slouching?

AND, will I have more chance of getting a RU recognised via LAX or SFO, or equal chances?? Better chances to US or back to AKL?

Thanks for any advice!
I'm 5'10" and a convert to the Spaceseat, having slept in both the window and the middle block of seats. The recline within the shell took a bit of getting used to, but I figured out the way to make it comfortable for me was to do that and put my roller handluggage on the floor as a footrest with the beanbag on it. I found the fixed shell seat design made it adequate to curl up and nod off for stretches of 2-3 hours at a time. I was in the window at the front, and there was plenty of room to get out to the aisle, and on the other flight in the middle block which offered adequate privacy. There was another passenger in the neighbouring seat, but we faced away from each other.

I haven't flown CX Y Class, so can't comment on those seats, but I know their awful reputation.

The 747 PE, which is nice downstairs or in pairs upstairs, is fine if you like to sit back and recline conventionally, but not for sprawling out so much. I find the Spaceseats softer than the conventional PE seats, and I find the conventional PE legrests to be nearly useless, being too short for my feet. I am less enamoured by upstairs PE, because you can see the BP seats you envy in the front, and I find the downstairs mini-cabin rather pleasant, albeit cold overnight.

The 747 has 39 seats, 777-300s 44 seats, 777-200s 36 seats, but I wouldn't bother with the latter unless it was cheap to buy so I could upgrade to BP (I have done just that on a recent booking).

So in theory, it is easier to upgrade to the 777-300s as there are more seats, but really the only way to tell is Expertflyer or looking at the fares. A Class availability makes it far more likely an upgrade will go through.

However, if you are buying PE and hoping to upgrade to BP, the 747s (via SFO) are better, as they have 46 BP seats compared to 44 on the 777-300s (and 28 on 777-200s).
libertyuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 13, 5:41 pm   #32
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 7,068
I am advising somebody flying TATL into LAX. From what I learned, it looks like NZ (LHR-LAX) or AF (CDG-LAX) seem to be some decent options.

How would you rate the prem eco seat on the NZ 777-300 vs. the prem eco seat on AF?
cesco.g is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 7:51 pm.