N830MH

http://www.aspireaviation.com/2013/1...K9sOFU.twitter

ANA is interesting the 777-9X model. They will made decision in January 2014. Hoping they will order the 777-9X to be replaced the current 777-300.

Let the speculation begin.

ainternational

Can someone more educated than I comment on the differences - e.g. what this may mean practically to an F/C/Y pax?

lovejapan

It is only the author of the article that uses an unnamed airline source to say that the airline favors the 777-X. Speculation does not make an order. JAL was also expected to be a 777-X launch customer and went A350.

No doubt Boeing will want to win this one and will get all of the political support it can muster.

It will be fun to watch which way it goes.

joejones

The fuselage width of the A350 is in between that of the 787 and 777. It can fit either 9 or 10 abreast in the back, like a 777, but with a seat width slightly narrower than that of a 777 in the same configuration. 777X has a very slightly wider cabin than the current 777s. I'd imagine that the difference in F and C would be negligible.

The 777-9X is longer than the 777-300ER while the 777-8X is roughly equivalent in capacity.

sl0uch

My impression is that NH very much pioneered downsizing from the 744 to the 77W: not only is the plane itself smaller but NH also went for quite the low-density seating. They figured out how this could work in tandem with the routes they cherry-picked based on yield. I suspect more than a few airlines borrowed from the NH playbook when they began to look at the 77W as 744 replacements, to help them work out how they might want to config.

Recent trend in the industry has been to squeeze more seats into the cabin, at least in Y, this was even supplanted by a tedious Airbus/Boeing PR war over seat width... So far it seems that out of all the airlines in the world, only NH and JL have been able to buck this trend, I'm guessing due to certain intrinsic nature of the Japanese market? Pricing structure, population, or both NH/JL being so TYO- and premium pax-centric?

I'm really interested in seeing how the NH & JL business models will evolve in the next era, when everyone goes for charter-esque Y seating and less F seats, if not also less J.

And shame on Boeing for giving everyone an official excuse to go 10-abreast in what's essentially still the 777 cabin; my understanding is that they're probably just making the 777-8/9X cabin a teeny tiny bit wider by resculpting the cabin walls.

ORDnHKG

Boeing didn't do anything to encourage customers to put 10 abreast on the 777. It exists long time ago back in the late 90s. I believe JL, NH, TG, and CZ were the first few did that config.

In case you didn't know, there are 330 and 340 operators put in 9 abreast in Y as well, one airline I know for sure is Air Asia X. So that is not Boeing's problem at all.

And although it is rare, there had at least 1 767 operator had put in 8 abreast in Y as well.

lovejapan

JL is flying 9 abreast on its 777-300ER. NH is just starting to introduce 10 abreast.

IIRC, AF was one of the first 777-300ER operators to go 10 abreast. BA tried it for a while on its Carribean routes and reverted back to 9 abreast after negative passenger feedback.

A simple check on Seat Guru shows that China Southern is at 10 abreast, while Thai is at 9 abreast.

ORDnHKG

777 was built from the mid-90s, and and there are airlines starting from the delivery around that time already started 10 abreast. The first 777 model was 772, then 773, then 772ER, and 77W.

Do you know JL has more than 77W ? Remember those Star Jets ? They were all 10 abreast ! Same with NH, all 772 and 773 (not 772ER or 77W) were 10 abreast from the beginning ! While JL and NH had 10 abreast on their domestic 777, odd enough JD keep it 9 abreast at 2-5-2.

TG had 10 abreast 772 and 773 (not 77W) when it first delivered, when those planes don't even have PTV in Y ! They had since taken one seat out per row and become 9 abreast.

armagebedar

NH and JL have both had 3-4-3 (10 abreast) in Y on their domestic 773s for quite a while now. Neither have 10 abreast on their internationally-configured aircraft.

lovejapan

The 777-X is being ordered for long-haul flights and will ultimately replace the 777-300ER on flights over 12 to 14 hours. The 10 abreast configuration that JL and NH have on their domestic non ER with an average of two hours would not work on long haul flights.

AlwaysAisle

Interior configuration of aircraft is pretty much up to individual airline, not aircraft manufacture. One thing Boeing do not want to do is to put unrealistic expectation to public. If you remember Airbus had cabin mockup of A380 with very roomy individual suites, duty free shops, library, and shower. Airbus encouraged press to make a visit to show off the mockup of A380 interior. However, after few months Airbus realized that it is very low possibility that airlines will configure interior of A380 like Airbus’ mockup model, and can be putting unrealistic expectation of A380 to public. Passenger onboard A380 for first time possibly can be little disappointed when see cabin of A380 is not roomier like the mockup of Airbus. After few months Airbus discontinued tour of A380 interior mockup to press.

Virginia Emery

If Air Canada can so can JL/NH

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/air-c...e-777hd-y.html

joejones

I always figured that they pawned off their cheapskate passengers on UA and AA respectively, thanks to joint ventures.

evergrn

I'm sure they'd be ordering 777-X for the long-haul flights. But the question is, are they going 10 abreast in Y on those flights?

I agree that 10 abreast config is a cruel joke for long-haul flights and it doesn't work. But some airlines don't see it that way.

lovejapan

NH may consider it, but JL is having a big advertising campaign pitching (no pun intended) better seat pitch in Y class, so I doubt that Japanese travellers would take the same punishment as AC's.