Bri1010

My wife and I are planning a trip to Buenos Aires in March, and we are planning on flying Business Class on LAN. I've never flown LAN, nor have I ever been in a 767 or 787, so I was wondering if the 787 product is noticeably better than the 767. The least expensive fare is 767 one way, 787 return, but I can pay a bit more to fly 787 both ways.

We recently flew business with Emirates, one way on a 777 and return on an A380, and the difference was noticeable (newer entertainment system, better amenities on the A380), and if I did it again, I would certainly pay more to fly the A380 over the 777. Just wasn't sure if this was the case with LAN.

Thank you.

Eastbay1K

Some of the 767 business cabins have been refurbished and some haven't. Those that have are "essentially" the same product as the 787, but still have narrower seats, no air vents, and aren't as comfortable. The older 767s have a glitchier IFE system (with pretty much the same content). They are all 2-2-2 but consider that the 767 has 7 seats across in the back, vs. the 787 which was 9.

sdsearch

I would presume the 787s and refurbished 767 also have better screens? The screens on the older LAN 767s I flew looked like they way predated HD. They actually looked way worse than a good tube TV fed HD signals turned into (SD) analog by a good converter box.

When you say "pretty much the same content", do the same number of movies on the new IFE say "this movie has been reformatted to fit your screen" as on the old IFE?

NorthValley

If you can go for 787. Its an overall better experience as the aircraft feels much more 'roomier' thatn the 767. There is also a definate noise reduction in the 787 cabin. Much quieter than the 767! Luckily all the routes I use (US, Oceania & Europe) are primarily 787! Have a good flight!

Gio Salinas

J product is basically the same.

Worst case scenario, you get an old 767 with a glitchy IFE and painfully slow (more than usual), decoration a little bit worn and rusty. One thing i like about J in 767 though, is that i feel the seat more soft than the 787.

TGGDEL

Just did TAM on the 767 from JFK. On the way down product was fine, as described 2-2-2 like a smaller version of the TK or LO with the ottoman. Beware though, on the way back it was an old seat, still 2-2-2 but the seat sucked, mostly flat but lumpy and tight. I'd take the 787 all day long.

jlarroulet

I have recently flown on both the 767 and 787 flavours of LAN's Premium Business cabin.

Both are very much the same thing. Service and meals are the same, IFE content is the same and (if flying a route operated by LA rather than 4M, LP or XL) most likely you'll get the post-retrofit 767.

The 787 cabin has all the 787 benefits (much quieter, better air humidity, etc) but the seat itself is pretty much the same. Keep in mind, however, that if you are taller than 5ft 11in, you'll find the 787 business seat to be a little tighter when fully flat (in the full flat position, the 787 seat is 5 ft 11.5 inches long; the 767 is 6ft 1in, as was the A340 business seat LAN used to operate)

sdsearch

But is IFE presentation the same on the 787 (as on the older 767s)? Ie, have the screens not been improved? Do they still say "edited for screen format" on just as many movies on the 787 as on the older 767s?

The screen quality and aspect ratio, as well as all the movies saying they were "edited for" that screen, seemed extremely out of date on the older 767s I flew on LAX-(LIM)-EZE and back last month.

MfromL

...or content.

<humour>

I don't know why but they've taken down All the president's men from the IFE. I've gotten drunk too many times to that movie while flying on LAN. I'm glad AA has not.

</humour>

jlarroulet

Premium Business IFE screens are the same size and aspect ratio on all three versions: 787, retrofit 767 (same as 787) and non-retrofit 767. IIRC, all are 15 or 17 inch screens of the same shape.

Sadly, the "edited to fit screen" is sometimes not because of the screen but because of the format that the content comes in. Mostly, older content has not been remastered so LAN's IFE content provider (can't remember who they are, but they are based in Europe) must reformat the 4:3 content so it doesn't distort on a widescreen. If you notice, newer releases are not edited to fit screen, just for content (which is an entirely different story)

sdsearch

But the non-retrofit 767 screen is not widescreen it's 4:3. So while widescreen modern releases are letterboxed, those older releases says "reformatted to fit screen" but they're letterboxes with vertical bars inside letterboxing with horiztonal bars! Ie, someone reformatted 4:3 to fit inside widescreen, but now they're displaying them on a 4:3 physical screen.

So if you're saying the non-retrofit 767s screens are the same size and aspect ratio as the newest 787, that implies there are no widescreen monitors anywhere in the LAN fleet, since the non-retrofit 767 screens I watched last month were definitely not widescreen, just low-resolution 4:3. (And yes, I was in Premium Business.)

og

The 787 is, as previously stated, a much more comfortable aircraft and noticeably quieter. But, if you like looking out the window - even at night - be aware that the crew take delight in force controlling the electronic windows to whatever they think is appropriate. So, while this is useful for an AKL-SCL flight it can be a pain otherwise.

GRUflyer

Guys,


I have flown both versions of the 767.

How can the seats on the 787-8 or 787-9 be any narrower than the 767 one? In flat bed mode I could barely breathe. And I am of normal weight and height!

sdsearch

You didn't quote any post above, and I can't find any post above that says the 787 is narrow than 767. So I can't figure out what you're referring to!

I find one post which says the footrest is a bit shorter, and another post which (if you read it carefully) is actually saying the 767 is narrower than the 787. There is a reference to the 787 in back seeming narrower, but if that carried through to the front, that may only affect seat-to-seat spacing, not seat width. And I find one post saying they like the softer feel of the 767 seats. But nothing I can find about 767 being narrower seats.

(As to your precise question of "how": Most business/first airplane seats that go from sitting up to flat have the width adjustable, and some airlines make that adjustment a little different on one plane type than another. I know AA with NGBC [their not-quite-horizontal flat seats of about a decade ago] had slightly different width on the 767 vs the 777.)

FlyerEC

Having just flown LAN for the first time , must say that I am impressed , a pleasant surprise . Was rather wary as it was first time also on PE - there was no business let alone F on the GRU - EZE flight in December . But it must have been the " new " / retrofitted 767 . It was much better than UA domestic F . The leg room was generous , comparable to SIA . ^
On the SCL - GRU last week , it the was the older 767 which was still decent enough . That was on B & PE seats were better on our first flight !! . No F on the flight .
Food was ok , choice of 2 items ..
Will be fine flying LH on them .