Cathay Pacific Asia Miles - Leg Space on Airbus A330....

Tried to do a search but could not find existing topic...

It's a complaint... :td:

Took Cathay... Sydney-HK-Seoul and return in Economy.....

Found that leg space is severely restricted by
1) TV/Video equipment under front seat... Cannot stretch legs completely...
2) When closed, the foot rest seems to close too high and the knees keep
hitting it....

Is there some website on comparison of leg space between airlines??

www.airlinequality.com has details on how many inches are the Economy Class seat pitches for individual airlines. But generally, the norm is about 31-32 inch. So seat pitches at CX Y class is neither generous nor too tight. But CX Y Class seats are kind of thick, thicker than many airlines, so I think that is why people are feeling less comfortable.

The trouble is that the older aircraft's has the box located under one particular seat whereas in the newer A330/A333 (B-HLW, B-LAA/B/C), the box is located between the two seats so each pax 'shares' the burden of limited legroom.

As for the footrest, I personally fond that annoying and useless if you are reasonably tall, the result would be your shins keep hitting the footrest.

Unfortunately its not just Cathay that suffers from intrusion of the Video box. Much the same in Singapore Airlines.

This is not a valid complaint.

You should have known before your flight that CX had 31-32" pitch in economy which is the industry standard. Regarding the video box restricting legroom, would you prefer to be flying another airline without PTVs?

Qantas on its 747s (not sure about the other aircraft) manage to put quite small sized boxes at the end of the rows of seats, so that there is no intrusion of the boxes into foot space. I don't know why CX isn't doing the same on their newest aircraft.

Qantas on its 747s (not sure about the other aircraft) manage to put quite small sized boxes at the end of the rows of seats, so that there is no intrusion of the boxes into foot space. I don't know why CX isn't doing the same on their newest aircraft.
Is a large IFE box needed for AVOD whereas QF (in most cases) has yet to get it and therefore has smaller IFE boxes?

Is a large IFE box needed for AVOD whereas QF (in most cases) has yet to get it and therefore has smaller IFE boxes?
CX doesn't have AVOD.

Regularly fly with QF & SQ and have yet to find any issue with footrest
or video box under the seat!!!

The video box is placed length-wise and at least it allows you to extend
your legs completely to stretch....

In Cathay case, it is placed horizontal... blocking foot access!!!!

CX doesn't have AVOD.Er, just to be clear, CX doesn't offer AVOD in Economy. It does have an excellent AVOD in business and first.

I agree about the stupid footrest on the 330... The only time I took the 330 in Y is from HKG to KUL, and my shins were hurting after the 3 hour flight! I would try to avoid the 330 if you are in Y.

Does CX still install this remnent from the Spanish inquisition in the new planes?

Does CX still install this remnent from the Spanish inquisition in the new planes?
I believe I was recently on one of the new airbuses (it had BUSINESS CLASS stitched into the divider curtain) and the footrest was there.

I find it a mockery in a way....they are emphasising airlines' small seat pitch by putting in a footrest that only someone 5'2 could use.

Interestingly, the 777s with the new seating (the ones with the cup holder in the tray) don't have the footrest.

economy class in general is pretty hellish. Even if you had 34" of legroom, you'd still feel cramped, unless you're familiar with what 32" feels like :)

economy class in general is pretty hellish. Even if you had 34" of legroom, you'd still feel cramped, unless you're familiar with what 32" feels like :)

Suggestion: Get the seats in exit rows or bulkhead rows in the middle
section (not the window sections). You'll get plenty more legroom in
those seats, plus no people reclining against you.

Good tip, I am taking NRT-DXB via HKG in two weeks and the HKG-DXB leg is a 330.

Kampai,
Klaxon :p

This is not a valid complaint.

You should have known before your flight that CX had 31-32" pitch in economy which is the industry standard. Regarding the video box restricting legroom, would you prefer to be flying another airline without PTVs?

no two ways about it, CX Y equipment blows unless u have an aisle seat on an exit row. :td: :td: :td: :td:

Have only flown twice on the 330 in Y - both times row 30 which is the first row. But I also tried a seat in the back - only comparable legroom has been on Lion Air, Orient Thai and Ryanair. It was horrible.

But sometimes I have a problem with the bulkheads too - had a 744 on FRA-HKG that had the audio/video controls fitted so that seat width was severely restricted. The ex-SQ on HKG-BKK had the usual remote so it was much better.

Suggestion: Get the seats in exit rows or bulkhead rows in the middle
section (not the window sections). You'll get plenty more legroom in
those seats, plus no people reclining against you.

While more legroom is good, seats are quite a bit narrower in the exit and bulkhead rows.... For me, 50% of my comfort comes from legroom, the other 50% from seat width.. so I would just avoid the 330 and much rather get a seat on a 777...

Er, just to be clear, CX doesn't offer AVOD in Economy. It does have an excellent AVOD in business and first.
Are you serious? And SQ gives you AVOD in all three classes? That's kinda a no-brainer...

Fly SQ then. CX won't be missing your business.

F and J are where the money are, and CX at this point in time does not think that it is cost effective to install AVOD in economy. They might install AVOD in Y in a few years when they retrofit the new F & J cabins.

Given that CX's economy class product is still miles ahead of most airlines, and that they have a satisfactory load factor, CX has nothing to worry about.

Given that CX's economy class product is still miles ahead of most airlines, and that they have a satisfactory load factor, CX has nothing to worry about.

Miles ahead by what standards? The difference I noticed between LH and CX was a menu and a useless amenity kit. Food was the same junk, and so were the seats and service. :rolleyes:

LH does not even have PTV on its newest aircraft, or any of their aircraft for that matter (except the ex. Sabena ones). The reason - they are not making money in Y. Yields are extremely low. Similar to CX - but LH's situation is much worse, and they have taken it a step further.

Fly SQ then. CX won't be missing your business.

F and J are where the money are, and CX at this point in time does not think that it is cost effective to install AVOD in economy. They might install AVOD in Y in a few years when they retrofit the new F & J cabins.

Given that CX's economy class product is still miles ahead of most airlines, and that they have a satisfactory load factor, CX has nothing to worry about.

While the 744 seats and the Enhanced Economy Class Seats (plus some
ex-SQ seats on A343) are decent, the CX seats on 34D and 333 are said
to be extremely narrow and uncomfortable, the BA/QF seats may be better
but they have less seat pitch than CX.

In terms of services, I think QF is already ahead of CX at least on the LHR-
HKG route, and the installation of AVOD would be another advantage of QF.