NetJets Germany

177cm / 5'10'' here, and even I find the A359 J seats uncomfortable - I cannot even imagine how annoying it must be if you are 6ft plus tall!

While the finishing looks nice, the screen is also far too close to one's face now - to the point that if I almost got motion sickness simply by watching a film, and I am by no means a feeble flyer.

grandgourmand

I flew the 772 seat on a redeye earlier this year. Was really excited to see the upgrade in equipment from what was originally a A330. I thought the SQ seat looked so spacious and it was, in width. But length, I was cramped (I am 195cm). Still better than Y, but I would choose the CX or BR style of seats (or NH) over SQ.

QRC3288

For hard product, begrudgingly I must say CX. Greetings from a regular on the CX board and we spend a lot of time whinging about CX over there. SQ provides us nice competition for CX HKG-SFO...and I happily oblige from time to time,although F more often than J lately.

CX J long-haul hard product is indeed superior to SQ, especially if you're tall. CX also didn't goof up its A350 design - the seat is a not-much-modified slightly-spiffier version of the existing CX Cirrus J (reverse herringbone) seat.

CX doesn't look as fancy and screen is smaller than SQ IME, but what CX offers is a very solid reverse herringbone. However, SQ has CX beat on the catering and "bling" factor. (and SQ has CX beat roundly on the regional J product, where CX is a complete disaster).

You know it's bad when people are saying they'd rather take BA!!

Kacee

I'm still waiting for someone to say they'd rather fly UA

crazyanglaisy

Lol, yeah, I thought someone might pick up on that!!

TheTakeOffRush

Any chance SQ will (be able to) fix their 350 J dimensions? Pitch-wise, I mean, not that claustrophobic foot box.

It's pretty much impossible, n'est-ce pas?

lokijuh

Personally I think it's sleeping position that determines if comfortable or not. Their seats tend to be better for side sleepers (I am one) who curl up a bit anyway. If you sleep on your back stretched out they are pretty bad.

markprice22

+1

I'm 6' 2". Took QR A350 JFK-DOH in J this past July. Excellent seat, both upright and when full flat.

I have booked SQ A350 J for next fall SIN-SFO, but based on this thread will pursue other options.

mys7ix

Thanks OP. I share the same height as you and I have yet to try a full experience in J.

Really wonder if it's that great, maybe I'd rather choose for PEY and spend the rest on other stuff since my utility from a J seat is certainly going to be much lower than someone who is not vertically challenged.

jjjohn

may be soon with UA new business product.

SQ325

^ that's why I still prefer the wider seat of SQ for sleeping. Most of the other seats give me coffin like position for sleeping which I don't really like.

demue

Sleeping to me is still okay as I also tend to rest on the side, but lounging I find very uncomfortable as mentioned. Twist spine to stick feet into the cubby hole or squish my feet when elevating the leg rest and deal with the lack of recline.

SQ325

I agree, the lounging function added on the 2013 seats doesnt make the seat better. Its still uncomfortable to sit.

flyasia

I'm surprised to read the comments. I haven't tried the new seat myself but I read quite positive feedback on the new J Seat that is on the new 777ER. What is so different about the A350 ? Does the plane's width makes it that uncomfortable?

crazycrab955

That's the difference for me. The A350 is just too small and narrow to accommodate the J seat, and the modifications to make it fit have impacted comfort. Also, there is an inescapable feeling of claustrophobia throughout the cabin, in the lavs, really everywhere...all due to the narrower/smaller dimensions relative to the 77W.

Terrible mistake for SQ to make the A350 the focal point of their longhaul flying going forward. They have not hesitated to pull the plug on Airbus failures in the past (A345), so perhaps they will wake up their idea on the "XWB" too.