Thai A350 Flights vs 777 ER
Sep 22, 2016, 8:17 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Asia
Posts: 295
Thai A350 Flights vs 777 ER
I live in Thailand and Thai Air does this crazy thing where they fly wide body jets for the 1 hour flight from Bangkok to Chiang Mai. This allows me to sample international configurations of every widebody plane Thai owns.
Recently Thai received their first A350. As they did with their Dreamliner, Thai flies their new planes domestically on the BKK-CNX route -- there are about 6 flights daily in this route on Thai, and they fly mostly their 777 (300 and 200, ER and regular) and 330 (all old configs in biz class) and now their first A350.
I flew the A350 in business class a few times last week. I want to provide a quick trip report and contrast the 350 to Thai's 777ER product.
The 350 is sleek and more future-forward looking than the 777. From the outside there are more sensors on the nose than any aircraft I've seen. The rivet-free wings are extremely nice. The plane is only a few weeks old, it is spotless inside and out.
The engine sound of this plane is very unique and sounds like a 777ER was sound-mixed by someone doing foley on Star Wars. It's unlike anything I've heard. I live in the takeoff flight path of CNX airport and I always know when the 350 is flying over my home.
The 350's business class is very similar in appearance to the new 777ER Royal Silk business class product. However, on close inspection, and after several trips, I definitely prefer the 777ER.
Thai appears to have made compromises to the 350's Royal Silk seats. They are more narrow, on the whole, the armrest is less substantial and thinner on the right side (if you are next to a window), the entry to the staggered seating "suite" is more narrow, there is substantially less room for your feet in the footwell under the area in front of you (the foot stool area that can connect in full recline to the seat to form the bed), and the overall surface space is less. In addition the tray table looks like it came out a nice economy class product on another airline. It does not move forward or back, only down into place or pinned on the wall. To get closer or farther from the tray table you have to move your seat.
The whole Royal Silk section feels like a 777ER was shrunk in a CAD program by a set percentage of some sort, say 15% or 20%, from the seat (as a whole piece) and the space between seats. It feels cramped compared to the 777ER and not as pleasant.
I usually fly in the front biz class section, last seat on the right, of each plane. On the 777ER this last row seat is comfortable, cozy and quiet. On the 350 I felt cramped and squished in.
It appears that Thai pushed the seats closer to 1) fit the cabin size difference between the two planes and 2) to fit one extra row of biz class seats. This is a mistake. They should have spread out the seats and kept them as they are on the 777ER.
The 350 is quiet inside and out.
The entertainment system is very nice, better by far than the 777ER.
The lavatories on the 350 are a big disappointment. Awful. There is one toilet forward of biz class and two behind. My first experience was in the one just behind the biz section, next to the galley. It was so small and awful I thought it was for economy. Maybe it is, but that's not what the crew was telling people and there was a curtain drawn inflight between this toilet and economy. The toilet is small, not well designed, Thai took out the higher end amenities and replaced the cloth towels with a stack of paper towels.
On the 777ER product the toilet is large, comfortable, luxurious, and has a dark wood floor. There are high end products and cloth towels. The 350 has none of this and was a big disappointment.
On subsequent trips I moved my seat into rows 16 (next to the window) and 17 (close to the window). These seats felt less cramped, though the overall seat appears exactly the same. Perhaps the last row of the 350 is especially wedged in, but I won't pick it in the future.
That's my report. My favorite plane of Thai's is the 747 product they ran several times a day between BKK and CNX for several years. You could often snag a first class seat if you were quick on seat selection - for the same price as business class. I would frequently be one of the only passengers flying upstairs on that route. Thai took the 747 out of this route more than a year ago and replaced it with 777 products. My favorite overall Thai plane is the new config of the 777ER. The plane is roomy, quiet, the seats are very good, the biz class area is high end with dark wood floors, large toilets, excellent cabin.
Thai was forced to delay their BKK-MEL route due to paperwork. This plane will continue on domestic routes, according to the last posted information on Thai's website, until "end of October" -- whatever that ends up being.
Recently Thai received their first A350. As they did with their Dreamliner, Thai flies their new planes domestically on the BKK-CNX route -- there are about 6 flights daily in this route on Thai, and they fly mostly their 777 (300 and 200, ER and regular) and 330 (all old configs in biz class) and now their first A350.
I flew the A350 in business class a few times last week. I want to provide a quick trip report and contrast the 350 to Thai's 777ER product.
The 350 is sleek and more future-forward looking than the 777. From the outside there are more sensors on the nose than any aircraft I've seen. The rivet-free wings are extremely nice. The plane is only a few weeks old, it is spotless inside and out.
The engine sound of this plane is very unique and sounds like a 777ER was sound-mixed by someone doing foley on Star Wars. It's unlike anything I've heard. I live in the takeoff flight path of CNX airport and I always know when the 350 is flying over my home.
The 350's business class is very similar in appearance to the new 777ER Royal Silk business class product. However, on close inspection, and after several trips, I definitely prefer the 777ER.
Thai appears to have made compromises to the 350's Royal Silk seats. They are more narrow, on the whole, the armrest is less substantial and thinner on the right side (if you are next to a window), the entry to the staggered seating "suite" is more narrow, there is substantially less room for your feet in the footwell under the area in front of you (the foot stool area that can connect in full recline to the seat to form the bed), and the overall surface space is less. In addition the tray table looks like it came out a nice economy class product on another airline. It does not move forward or back, only down into place or pinned on the wall. To get closer or farther from the tray table you have to move your seat.
The whole Royal Silk section feels like a 777ER was shrunk in a CAD program by a set percentage of some sort, say 15% or 20%, from the seat (as a whole piece) and the space between seats. It feels cramped compared to the 777ER and not as pleasant.
I usually fly in the front biz class section, last seat on the right, of each plane. On the 777ER this last row seat is comfortable, cozy and quiet. On the 350 I felt cramped and squished in.
It appears that Thai pushed the seats closer to 1) fit the cabin size difference between the two planes and 2) to fit one extra row of biz class seats. This is a mistake. They should have spread out the seats and kept them as they are on the 777ER.
The 350 is quiet inside and out.
The entertainment system is very nice, better by far than the 777ER.
The lavatories on the 350 are a big disappointment. Awful. There is one toilet forward of biz class and two behind. My first experience was in the one just behind the biz section, next to the galley. It was so small and awful I thought it was for economy. Maybe it is, but that's not what the crew was telling people and there was a curtain drawn inflight between this toilet and economy. The toilet is small, not well designed, Thai took out the higher end amenities and replaced the cloth towels with a stack of paper towels.
On the 777ER product the toilet is large, comfortable, luxurious, and has a dark wood floor. There are high end products and cloth towels. The 350 has none of this and was a big disappointment.
On subsequent trips I moved my seat into rows 16 (next to the window) and 17 (close to the window). These seats felt less cramped, though the overall seat appears exactly the same. Perhaps the last row of the 350 is especially wedged in, but I won't pick it in the future.
That's my report. My favorite plane of Thai's is the 747 product they ran several times a day between BKK and CNX for several years. You could often snag a first class seat if you were quick on seat selection - for the same price as business class. I would frequently be one of the only passengers flying upstairs on that route. Thai took the 747 out of this route more than a year ago and replaced it with 777 products. My favorite overall Thai plane is the new config of the 777ER. The plane is roomy, quiet, the seats are very good, the biz class area is high end with dark wood floors, large toilets, excellent cabin.
Thai was forced to delay their BKK-MEL route due to paperwork. This plane will continue on domestic routes, according to the last posted information on Thai's website, until "end of October" -- whatever that ends up being.
Last edited by davevi; Sep 22, 2016 at 8:25 am Reason: Photo of 350 Cabin Added...
Sep 22, 2016, 12:15 pm
#2
Join Date: May 2009
Location: LON
Programs: BAEC GGL; KLM Gold; AC 50K
Posts: 147
Good report! Thanks!
70% of my long-haul sectors (20+) in the past year have been in variants of the 777 (QR/SQ/BR/CX) and three sectors in QR A350. I have come to the conclusion that the A350 felt newer (as new planes should), perhaps a bit quieter (really not much difference from the middle biz seats), but as you have noted, not quite as spacious as the 77x.
70% of my long-haul sectors (20+) in the past year have been in variants of the 777 (QR/SQ/BR/CX) and three sectors in QR A350. I have come to the conclusion that the A350 felt newer (as new planes should), perhaps a bit quieter (really not much difference from the middle biz seats), but as you have noted, not quite as spacious as the 77x.
Sep 22, 2016, 10:39 pm
#4
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: BKK
Programs: TG ROP Platinum, M&M Senator, IHG Platinum, Accor Platinum
Posts: 8,314
thanks for the comprehensive report!
quite a bit disappointing that the seats are a setback in comparison to the 777-300ER and the A380
I also miss the 747 on the BKK CNX; I always got a F class seat
quite a bit disappointing that the seats are a setback in comparison to the 777-300ER and the A380
I also miss the 747 on the BKK CNX; I always got a F class seat
Sep 22, 2016, 10:47 pm
#5
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Programs: TG*G
Posts: 1,369
Are you comparing the A350 cabin with the latest version of B777-300ER cabin? THAI has made some design changes on later B777-300ER. Some of the thing that you mentioned such as the tray table, is exactly the same on A350 and the later B777-300ER. The same goes for the armrest design.
The paper towel vs real towel has nothing to do with the aircraft.
The bed length is the same on both aircraft, so it's not possible that THAI squeeze one more row there.
The ratio of passenger per lavatory is better on A350 at 12:1 vs B777-300ER's 14:1.
I guess the real difference may be the seat width, which may be around 1 inch, nothing close to 15-20%
The paper towel vs real towel has nothing to do with the aircraft.
The bed length is the same on both aircraft, so it's not possible that THAI squeeze one more row there.
The ratio of passenger per lavatory is better on A350 at 12:1 vs B777-300ER's 14:1.
I guess the real difference may be the seat width, which may be around 1 inch, nothing close to 15-20%
Sep 24, 2016, 8:40 am
#7
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: WLG/BKK
Programs: TG*G, NZ*GE, QF G, Accor Gold
Posts: 10,172
Having just flown BKK-CNX-BKK//BKK-CNX-BKK on the 359 in Economy on Tues/Wed last week(just needed those 2k miles for ROP Gold), I will now try and find a moment to provide a similar perspective on the economy cabin. It'll be against the 333/330 and 773 rathe the 77W though.
Cheers, TK
Cheers, TK
Sep 27, 2016, 7:17 pm
#8
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: 6km East of EPAYE
Programs: UA Silver, AA Platinum, AS & DL GM Marriott TE, Hilton Gold
Posts: 9,582
Oct 2, 2016, 8:52 am
#9
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Programs: TG*G
Posts: 1,369
Just want to note that I don't feel any significant difference on the J seats on THAI's 777-300ER vs A380 vs A350. There are two basic versions: older one can be found on A380 and the first 8 B777-300ER, the newer one (shown in the OP's photo) can be found on the last 7 B777-300ER and A350. The changes are in the detail while seat structural design are basically the same.
Jul 25, 2017, 11:36 pm
#10
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Washington DC
Programs: Marriott Platinum, United Gold, Virgin Silver
Posts: 418
I need to do SYD-BKK-LHR for work and am keen on trying Thai's J product.
What i'm trying to figure out is how much doing the a380 vs. a350 really matters.
I'm not very tall, sleep well on most lie flats, and am not really that finicky about new seats. For comparison, I just did Air Indian J CDG-DEL-SYD on 787-9 with 5 years of age and had no issues with that seat. However, on the outbound, I was completely annoyed by the old Asiana 777 J with previous generation highly angled seats, circa 2010.
Any advice would be appreciated as I'm excited to try to Thai's product and want to get the plane right.
What i'm trying to figure out is how much doing the a380 vs. a350 really matters.
I'm not very tall, sleep well on most lie flats, and am not really that finicky about new seats. For comparison, I just did Air Indian J CDG-DEL-SYD on 787-9 with 5 years of age and had no issues with that seat. However, on the outbound, I was completely annoyed by the old Asiana 777 J with previous generation highly angled seats, circa 2010.
Any advice would be appreciated as I'm excited to try to Thai's product and want to get the plane right.
Jul 26, 2017, 4:30 am
#11
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Melbourne
Programs: Velocity Gold
Posts: 1,069
Unfortunately SYD-BKK you will get very average old J product, try and stick to day flights on that leg.
Otherwise the A380's have the more plastic looking full light purple scheme. The A350 has the more subdued rich tones, much better decor.
Otherwise the A380's have the more plastic looking full light purple scheme. The A350 has the more subdued rich tones, much better decor.
Jul 26, 2017, 9:04 am
#12
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Portland OR & Bangkok
Programs: United GS, Marriott Ambassador
Posts: 662
Just managed to snatch two seats in "O" on TG 476 (Using UA miles), so I'm curious. I was contemplating between the two flights, but hopefully from your answer, I made the right choice
Jul 26, 2017, 5:35 pm
#13
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Melbourne
Programs: Velocity Gold
Posts: 1,069
May I asked why it is better given that both flights are served by the 747-All Series?
Just managed to snatch two seats in "O" on TG 476 (Using UA miles), so I'm curious. I was contemplating between the two flights, but hopefully from your answer, I made the right choice
Just managed to snatch two seats in "O" on TG 476 (Using UA miles), so I'm curious. I was contemplating between the two flights, but hopefully from your answer, I made the right choice
Jul 26, 2017, 10:33 pm
#14
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: BKK
Programs: TG ROP Platinum, M&M Senator, IHG Platinum, Accor Platinum
Posts: 8,314
Jul 29, 2017, 10:07 am
#15
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,481
The FA on my A350 flight was good and the one on A380 was perfect. But I'm afraid that is not linked with the type of airplane.
