United MileagePlus (Consolidated) - TATL 757 BF compared to wide-body BF

Actually found BF R availability to LHR -but it's on a pmCO 757 rather than the pmUA wide bodies that I've always flown before. How do that compare? Any significant difference?

sCO 757-200s have an "intimate" feel in the BusinessFirst cabin; there are just 8 pods.

I'd rather be in a 752 J seat than play the sUA 777 lottery.

sCO 757-200s have an "intimate" feel in the BusinessFirst cabin; there are just 8 pods.

I'd rather be in a 752 J seat than play the sUA 777 lottery.

The CO 752s have 16 seats in C, not 8.

OP, I'd look at some of the true UA 767 flights to LHR. You're guaranteed to have a lie-flat in C.

The CO 752s have 16 seats in C, not 8.

OP, I'd look at some of the true UA 767 flights to LHR. You're guaranteed to have a lie-flat in C.

Isn't the pmCO 752 also a guaranteed lie-flat?

Isn't the pmCO 752 also a guaranteed lie-flat?

Yes. However the OP mentioned wanting to be on a wide-body, and if they chose a UA 767, they are guaranteed a lie-flat, as opposed to the chance that the 777 swaps to barca-loungers.

About the only differences are fewer programming choices on the AVOD system and a very slight reduction in foot well dimensions. As much as I like widebodies, the personalized service in a 757 with only 16 BF passengers (max) more than makes up for the deficiencies IMO.

About the only differences are fewer programming choices on the AVOD system and a very slight reduction in foot well dimensions. As much as I like widebodies, the personalized service in a 757 with only 16 BF passengers (max) more than makes up for the deficiencies IMO.

Agree. We flew on CO LHR-EWR last August and thought the experience was excellent. Very attentive crew, good food, comfortable seat.

About the only differences are fewer programming choices on the AVOD system and a very slight reduction in foot well dimensions. As much as I like widebodies, the personalized service in a 757 with only 16 BF passengers (max) more than makes up for the deficiencies IMO.

"personalized service?". LOL, what I found that to be on my first 757 TATL was good service during the meal and a disappearing act until breakfast.

If God had meant for 757's to fly TATL routes, he would have given them winglets at birth. It's not natural to be on a 757 for a "long haul" flight

Perfectly fine in my experience from a comfort perspective, and with the right crew it's even quite pleasant (with the small cabin etc)

If God had meant for 757's to fly TATL routes, he would have given them winglets at birth. It's not natural to be on a 757 for a "long haul" flight People survived 707 and DC-8 TATLs in similar cabin dimensions for 25 years and thought they were living the dream. Widebody bias on the North Atlantic has always seemed a little silly to me given aviation history.

Actually found BF R availability to LHR -but it's on a pmCO 757 rather than the pmUA wide bodies that I've always flown before. How do that compare? Any significant difference?

For a short hop like NYC-LHR, I don't think you'll notice a ton of difference. The 757 BF cabin is more cozy, but it's the same seat, the same food, and the same AVOD system.

Anyone who thinks a 757 hop across the Pond is blasphemy should look at Air Canada flights 822 & 823. ;)

Like many of the other posters, I enjoy the intimate feel of the smaller cabin. I find the seats comfortable and, when given the choice between the 777 and 757 EWRLHR I always opt for the 757.

I'd agree IMO the 757 TATL in BF has a more initimate feel than on the 777.

If God had meant for 757's to fly TATL routes, he would have given them winglets at birth.

That's a hilarious quote :D:D:D

About the only differences are fewer programming choices on the AVOD system and a very slight reduction in foot well dimensions.
And no fancy coffee machine.

I fly the 9:00 am EWR-LHR flight several times a year and love it. I think on an overnight flight it would be fine as well. I probably would do the window though only because I wouldn't want my neighbor to wake me up to go to the restroom.

Anyone who thinks a 757 hop across the Pond is blasphemy should look at Air Canada flights 822 & 823. ;)

How about BA 1 / 2?

How about BA 1 / 2?

They will usually be called out as an exception around here since they are aircraft designed for long haul flights and fitted out more like a large business jet than a regular passenger flight. Despite the fact that the high-profile way to cross the Atlantic has always been on narrow-body aircraft (The early jets mentioned above, Concorde, and now Gulfstream / Global Express jets and the BA / Privatair flights) it is still seen as "wrong" by many armchair experts here.

The UA 757 product is on a par with any other US airline's business product across the Atlantic. Slightly better in some ways, slightly worse in others.

If God had meant for 757's to fly TATL routes, he would have given them winglets at birth. It's not natural to be on a 757 for a "long haul" flight

Some TATL routes are just over 3000 miles.
ORD-ANC is just under 3000 miles, and is operated with a 737. Is that "natural"?

They will usually be called out as an exception around here since they are aircraft designed for long haul flights and fitted out more like a large business jet than a regular passenger flight. Despite the fact that the high-profile way to cross the Atlantic has always been on narrow-body aircraft (The early jets mentioned above, Concorde, and now Gulfstream / Global Express jets and the BA / Privatair flights) it is still seen as "wrong" by many armchair experts here.

757 in J is fine TATL.

I've flown EWR-OSL-EWR in a 757 dozens of times. It was fine with the old BF seats and better with the lie-flats. Even if you're in the aisle seat, the window passenger can easily step over you without disruption when you're sleeping, much better than the barca loungers.

Some TATL routes are just over 3000 miles.
ORD-ANC is just under 3000 miles, and is operated with a 737. Is that "natural"?

No - but at least it's not over water

Gotta say I don't like it. Cabin feels cramped, tends to get warm (for no apparent reason and apparently beyond the crew's control...they fix it, but it's often too late), AVOD is embarrassing - no selection. The good news is that Bangor is nice this time of year (half-kidding - half only because you're flying from London).

No - but at least it's not over water

I have to say that I don't quite understand the "I don't want to fly a NB like the 757 across the Atlantic because it's over water" point of view.
It can't be because it's a twin engine aircraft, right? I don't see how flying a 757 would mean any higher risk flying over the Atlantic compared to twin engine aircraft like 767 or 777.
Sure, they have to stop and top off the gas now and then, but I don't thinks there's been any case of running critically low on fuel while still over water.

Actually found BF R availability to LHR -but it's on a pmCO 757 rather than the pmUA wide bodies that I've always flown before. How do that compare? Any significant difference?

I think the CO BF is larger than the UA C seat. You'll get a better experience with the PMCO product.

Yes. However the OP mentioned wanting to be on a wide-body, and if they chose a UA 767, they are guaranteed a lie-flat, as opposed to the chance that the 777 swaps to barca-loungers.

That's actually not what the OP said. I have the post quoted above.

People survived 707 and DC-8 TATLs in similar cabin dimensions for 25 years and thought they were living the dream. Widebody bias on the North Atlantic has always seemed a little silly to me given aviation history.

Electra via GAN & SNN !

PMCO 752 AVOD is pretty great. Lots of movies, tv series, music and games.
I like the plane. I prefer the PMCO 772 version but the 752 seats are good, services is good and the food is good. Give it a try.

Gotta say I don't like it. Cabin feels cramped, tends to get warm (for no apparent reason and apparently beyond the crew's control...they fix it, but it's often too late), AVOD is embarrassing - no selection. The good news is that Bangor is nice this time of year (half-kidding - half only because you're flying from London).

How about BA 1 / 2?

They will usually be called out as an exception around here since they are aircraft designed for long haul flights and fitted out more like a large business jet than a regular passenger flight. Despite the fact that the high-profile way to cross the Atlantic has always been on narrow-body aircraft (The early jets mentioned above, Concorde, and now Gulfstream / Global Express jets and the BA / Privatair flights) it is still seen as "wrong" by many armchair experts here.

The UA 757 product is on a par with any other US airline's business product across the Atlantic. Slightly better in some ways, slightly worse in others.

Understood. Simply pointing out that there is scheduled TATL airline service on an aircraft smaller than the 757 and A319. I assume the folks who prefer WB J over NB J wouldn't feel differently if the entire NB aircraft was J.

PMCO 752 AVOD is pretty great. Lots of movies, tv series, music and games.

You sure you're not confusing it with the 777 AVOD? There's almost no content on the 757. A handful of movies and shows.

Been on both and while the 772 definitely has more my last two trips on a 752 had a decent selection.

You sure you're not confusing it with the 777 AVOD? There's almost no content on the 757. A handful of movies and shows.

"personalized service?". LOL, what I found that to be on my first 757 TATL was good service during the meal and a disappearing act until breakfast.

One man's sauce is another man's poison.

I prefer that the FA's aren't walking around the cabin and talking to passengers during sleep time. If I need something, I don't hesitate to reach up and hit the call button.

And no fancy coffee machine.

I can't believe I forgot about the coffee machine :)

Service-wise, one of the biggest differences is that on the 777, and to a lesser degree on the 767, it takes a long time to get through dinner. There's just so much service-wear to get out, meals to heat and pass out, drinks to refill, dishes to collect, etc. Despite the frantic pace, it's always taken 2+ hours from start to finish. On the 757, the meal service seems to go much faster and more smoothly. More time for sleeping.

You sure you're not confusing it with the 777 AVOD? There's almost no content on the 757. A handful of movies and shows.

The AVOD selection on the 752's is more limited than the 772's, but given that they tend to run on routes of 7-8 hours max, I've always found it more than sufficient.

The AVOD selection on the 752's is more limited than the 772's, but given that they tend to run on routes of 7-8 hours max, I've always found it more than sufficient.

Not really. They run some nearly 10 hour routes (TXL-EWR at certain times comes to mind). And you run out on that flight. And then have to come back!

Anyone who thinks a 757 hop across the Pond is blasphemy should look at Air Canada flights 822 & 823. ;)

Never heard of these flights before, so I just took a peek over at FlightAware....holy mother of god; a TATL on a domestic 319?! Granted, its the same distance as a CLT-SEA transcon that US flies w/ 319s, but still...its TATL. I hope that there's at least int'l soft product?

Never heard of these flights before, so I just took a peek over at FlightAware....holy mother of god; a TATL on a domestic 319?! Granted, its the same distance as a CLT-SEA transcon that US flies w/ 319s, but still...its TATL. I hope that there's at least int'l soft product?

Not that I'm aware of; for a flight that short, I don't know that there's a ton of demand for it. My wife and I are booked on this run in September, and I'm curious to try it out. Now that we're living in St. John's, we couldn't pass up the chance for a quick hop to London.

I was surprised to learn a few weeks ago that AC had extended the route's availability through the end of October (it was originally scheduled to end sometime towards the end of September). I guess it's been popular. It certainly makes connecting into Europe a heck of a lot easier than having to double back to Toronto or Newark before heading back east.

I like the smaller more intimate feel of the 752 BF product....service is generally more attentive too

Can one state re catering /food/drinks in business class: PMCO 757 = PMCO 777 = PMUA 3-class 777 ?

Can one state re catering /food/drinks in business class: PMCO 757 = PMCO 777 = PMUA 3-class 777 ?

Supposed to be exactly the same now in business.

No significant difference. They are both aluminum tubes which have petroleum driven engines attached and fly through the air to get you to the desired destination thanks to some really smart engineers and hard working people.

Supposed to be exactly the same now in business.

Not necessarily true. The service is a bit more elaborate on 2-cabin a/c for the appetizer and cheese/dessert course.

Widebody bias on the North Atlantic has always seemed a little silly to me given aviation history.

:confused: Under this line of reasoning we should all be content with flying DC-7's TATL.

Any views on best seat on in J on a 752? Looks like they all are substantially similar. One better than another for 6' 3"?

Any views on best seat on in J on a 752? Looks like they all are substantially similar. One better than another for 6' 3"?

Only the bulkheads have full sized footwells, all other rows are half sized.

:confused: Under this line of reasoning we should all be content with flying DC-7's TATL. If there was a DC-7 I'd book it immediately. Would be a blast!

Surprised nobody's commented on the seat length -

I'm over 6' and will avoid the 752 and 744 upper deck for the shorter length. Unfortunately, the reconfigured 764/763 have the same short length as well. When attempting to sleep, my feet will be jammed in the forward foot cubby, which makes sleep only really possible if I scrunch up on my side. If you don't snag a bulkhead, two feet cannot be fit side by side in the foot cubby. This is a big problem for me, to the point that I prefer the 2-4-2 IPTE 777/744 and 2-2-2 763.

With that said, the BF/IPTE seats are mid-pack at best at this point. Both products are aging quickly (5 years old already), and the new generation of seats from AA will eclipse UA. Hopefully we'll see a new product in 6-7 years time that will once again bring UA to the front of their domestic peers (which IPTE/BF did, in 2008)

With that said, the BF/IPTE seats are mid-pack at best at this point. Both products are aging quickly (5 years old already), and the new generation of seats from AA will eclipse UA. Hopefully we'll see a new product in 6-7 years time that will once again bring UA to the front of their domestic peers (which IPTE/BF did, in 2008)

Not just the AA/US/CX seats - the business staggered products of LX, NH, SN, DL, OZ, soon to be TG are all better than the UA seats as well.

I have my doubts we'll see new UA seats in 5 years.

I have my doubts we'll see new UA seats in 5 years.At the current pace, UA will be just wrapping up the current re-configuration of B777 in 5 years. :p

Hey there,

I have my first trip in a 757 upcoming on HAM-EWR. What is the best E+ seat on the plane?

I have 8A now on the outbound and 21C on the inbound. What do you think?

Cheers

7A/C, 8D/F and 21A/C/D/F in that order, in terms of legroom. The issue with the bulkhead seats in 7A/C and 8D/F is that they are narrower because of the tray table.

Row 20 is the only row in E+ to really avoid since it doesn't recline. Apart from that the other seats are roughly comparable.

Thanks a lot! Thank I stick with what I have :)