DCF

When I'm at home in the evening I don't just recline flatter and flatter until I fall asleep.

I have this weird ritual in which I get up, brush my teeth and go to the toilet then go to bed.

I do the same when I'm lucky enough to fly Air NZ Business Premier.

mad_atta

Ha! That made me laugh out loud. Well said!

Of any business class seat I've tried, NZ's is definitely the most comfortable for sleeping, and for me the very minor (and occasional) inconvenience of not being able to recline continuously to a flat surface (e.g. if having a mid-afternoon nap on a day flight) is more than outweighed by having a great, one-piece sleeping surface. In fact, I'd say NZ's 773 BP bed is at least as comfortable for sleeping, even if not quite so spacious, as the first class products I've flown (LH old F; NH old F suite, LX old F, TG A380).

By contrast, Air Canada's flat bed (which is the same design as CX's old one, and is a cheaper variant from the same manufacturer that makes NZ's and VS's) does recline straight back into a bed, and is vastly less comfortable and more bumpy than NZ's bed as a result.

I would love to try CX's new seat, though. Reverse herringbone seats do seem like they are probably the best of all worlds for business class (I do tire of craning my neck trying to see out on NZ) but I have yet to have the opportunity to try one.

How do those in the know rate NZ's BP bed against the QF Skybed 2 (i.e. the fully flat version they have in the A380 and some 744s)? I've only tried the old sloping Skybed, and IMHO NZ's product is in a different league for comfort...

Kiwi Flyer

NZ business premier seat is more comfortable for both sitting and sleeping than QF skybed mark 2.

WellingtonFlyer

Can anyone confirm if this is the seat configuration for the 777-200 Refit?

http://postimg.cc/image/9pqalaumd/

ANZ787900

It sure looks right.. 312 seats agrees with the previous 772 seat thread.

libertyuk

I've flown the new CX product (HKG-MEL) and it is the best J Class seat I have ever been in, for sitting and sleeping. Compared to QF and BA in First, it is only inferior in terms of width and length, but in every other way it is not far off it.

However, that LOPA for NZ 777-200s is interesting (if this is confirmed) in that:

- BP has 30 rather than 26 seats, although I doubt the "mini-cabin" for BP between PE bassinet row and the galley and toilets will be sought after
- PE has 40 rather than 36 seats, which is fair enough given the 9 abreast config in PE has always been poor
- Y looks just grim, with the only respite being the sets of pairs in the rear cabin.

Furthermore, with BP and PE getting 8 more passengers, the cabins still share three bathrooms, which is just not enough.

In short, front two cabins will be ok, but cattle class will be just that.

We can be grateful that the 787 in BP isn't 1-2-1 like VS wants to introduce with its truncated "new" Upper Class Suite.

mad_atta

I suspect that seatmap is an internet armchair expert's amateur cobbled-together version in illustrator. I really can't see NZ putting another single row of BP behind door 2, without there being some kind of bulkhead there (which would be marked if it existed, like on the new 787 seatmap.

JerseySlime

I would agree that NZ BP in a 772/3 (flown many times EWR-LHR in VS UC) is a bit more comfortable for sleeping than QF SkyBed V2 (flew LAX-MEL in the UD in J on the 388), but not for sitting. Not enough leg support in a minor recline position from the VS seat for me.

sbiddle

I was told a few days ago it's a 26/40/246 split so if the seat map shows that it's probably correct.

sbiddle

Just looking at that map it doesn't match up with what I was told so it'll be interesting to see what the final layout is. 26 BP seats would only fit in the front cabin, that image shows 30 BP seats but has the 40 PE seats that I was told

ANZ787900

It makes me wonder where the extra 4 Y seats will be from if you took out the 4 J seats in the 2nd section - there's enough room for a proper row of 8-10 seats if you remove the J seats. Unless somehow there'll be a bar installed or something..

WellingtonFlyer

I assume this is more accurate then, E - 246, PE - 40, BP - 26

-Error-

Blackcloud

Both do not look official, espcially the first one.
I thought the Sky Couch required more pitch but maybe the NZ maps as non-technical drawings do not need to have that level of accuracy.

cavemanzk

Pretty much booth look at as a bad a temp of using Photoshop.

If you look at the second one, the last 4 rows on either side change color from the rest. On the middle section on the right hand side you can see where they have added a 4th seat as they aren't aligmed properly.

Highly like to be fake, to be it looks like a mix of the 77W, current 772 and 789 seat maps photoshoped

jglenn16

Any updates on whether NZ has started the retrofit of the 777-200s yet? I read they were to have started it last month. I have a flight in Dec 2014, and hoping it'll be completed by then!