Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

Everything You Want to Know About Where to Sit on a sUA 767 (3-class International)

Old Mar 9, 2017, 11:00 am
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: drewguy
Print Wikipost

Everything You Want to Know About Where to Sit on a sUA 767 (3-class International)

Old Feb 22, 2008, 1:13 pm
  #46  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco
Programs: United/Star Alliance - 1K
Posts: 2,176
Which new 763 C seat?

The u/g cleared on 937 Sun (IAD-SFO), which is a 763 with the new C config. (That's now SFO-FRA-ORD-IAD-SFO all in 3 class C for $665. ^) Anyway, so 6H, 9J, K are open and face forward; 9H, 8J, K, 10K are open and face rear. Anyone have experience with rear facing? Seat thoughts? Thanks.
Javan69 is offline  
Old Feb 22, 2008, 1:44 pm
  #47  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: IAD
Programs: UA 1k, AA, DL, Marriott Plat
Posts: 65
business class...

Originally Posted by Javan69
The u/g cleared on 937 Sun (IAD-SFO), which is a 763 with the new C config. (That's now SFO-FRA-ORD-IAD-SFO all in 3 class C for $665. ^) Anyway, so 6H, 9J, K are open and face forward; 9H, 8J, K, 10K are open and face rear. Anyone have experience with rear facing? Seat thoughts? Thanks.
First, don't get your hopes up - as of the evening before my flight FRA > IAD on Monday, I, too was faced with this quandry... selected my seat on ".bomb" which aptly warned me that I might be facing rearward only to board the aircraft and find, alas, old seats.

With that said, SeatGuru.com does now have the new seatmap for the aircraft...though there isn't much commentary about what's a good or bad seat as of the last time I checked.

Others in the past have commented that row 10 is seated almost directly across from the galley entryway, and so would be subject to constant disturbance.

Only rear-facing I have ever done was on an Allegheney (!) DC-9... it was interesting to see the ground go away in the "other" direction. Aside from that I'm not sure that there'd be a significant difference. Others who have actually been graced with an opportunity to fly the new configuration will likely comment shortly. There's also a chance this thread will be moved to another discussing the new config in more detail. Cheers - and enjoy either way!
jbrevard is offline  
Old Feb 22, 2008, 3:59 pm
  #48  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Programs: DL Diamond, UA 1K MM, SPG Plat For Life, Marriott Plat, Nexus/GlobalEntry
Posts: 9,198
I have not tried the new C yet but I would be inclined to try out one of the rear facing seats on a 767 for a couple reasons... the first is that there have already been (and I'm sure there will be many more) posts on this board showing apprehension to flying backwards... you would be able to share your actual experience on the subject.. and the second is on the 767 the galley is in the rear of the C class cabin so you could more easily wave at the FA's to bring you more wine
SEA1K4EVR is offline  
Old Mar 10, 2008, 10:56 pm
  #49  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: NYC
Programs: UA 1.5 Million Mile flyer, Hilton Diamond, Bonvoy Gold, Hertz 5* and PC since 1985
Posts: 5,611
What a let down, what a hunk of wasted money.
What a bunch of cheap ba$tard$, you would think they wouldn't skimp but they did.
Got some news for all, these planes have been pulled from International service because they don't work.
The reason this plane is flying domestic is they can't get it serviced in FRA.
The seats are OK, my 6'3" frame wasn't very comfortable. The backwards seats were "interesting" I now know how the FA's feel on take off.
AVOD never worked for me and in all of C only 6 units did work.
More later, need to sleep
BDLORD is offline  
Old Mar 11, 2008, 11:00 am
  #50  
Used to be 'g_leyser'
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brandon Johnson International Airport (expect delays)
Programs: AA PlatPro, HH Gold, Bonvoy Gold, IHG Plat, Reno Air MEGA Platinum
Posts: 10,015
Originally Posted by BDLORD
What a let down, what a hunk of wasted money.
What a bunch of cheap ba$tard$, you would think they wouldn't skimp but they did.
Got some news for all, these planes have been pulled from International service because they don't work.
The reason this plane is flying domestic is they can't get it serviced in FRA.
The seats are OK, my 6'3" frame wasn't very comfortable. The backwards seats were "interesting" I now know how the FA's feel on take off.
AVOD never worked for me and in all of C only 6 units did work.
More later, need to sleep
aisleorwindow is offline  
Old Mar 11, 2008, 11:30 am
  #51  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Portland
Programs: HH Gold, Alaska MVP Gold
Posts: 4,074
Originally Posted by BDLORD
What a let down, what a hunk of wasted money.
What a bunch of cheap ba$tard$, you would think they wouldn't skimp but they did.
Got some news for all, these planes have been pulled from International service because they don't work.
The reason this plane is flying domestic is they can't get it serviced in FRA.
The seats are OK, my 6'3" frame wasn't very comfortable. The backwards seats were "interesting" I now know how the FA's feel on take off.
AVOD never worked for me and in all of C only 6 units did work.
More later, need to sleep
wow..would love to hear more on what you experienced.
UCBeau is offline  
Old Apr 16, 2008, 12:37 pm
  #52  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: SF, CA USA
Programs: UA 1K MM, RCC, PreChk , Hertz 5* Gold, HH Silver, SPG Gold thx to Amex Plat
Posts: 490
UA 907 (ORD-SFO) on 3/30

...was the new config. Prior to the flight, the seatmaps in my itins switched back and forth a couple of times from the old biz to new biz, and I kept getting assigned seats/rows that I did not like.

The seats/IFE are great, but the overhead bins are still small (typically for 767s). My 20" rollaboard would only fit in sideways in the side bins, not the center overhead bins.
ger3sf is offline  
Old Apr 16, 2008, 12:41 pm
  #53  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 23,999
Originally Posted by ger3sf
The seats/IFE are great, but the overhead bins are still small (typically for 767s). My 20" rollaboard would only fit in sideways in the side bins, not the center overhead bins.
That's because they haven't changed. They changed the outside to make them look nicer, apparently, but the actual room remains unchanged, AFAIK.
lucky9876coins is offline  
Old Jun 8, 2008, 3:05 pm
  #54  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SAN
Programs: UA 1MM/1K, HH Diamond
Posts: 6,824
New C Seats in the 763 Cabin - My Thoughts

Yesterday was really something... Expecting to do a usual p.s. C one-day, back-and-forth to the West Coast and ended up with over 10 hours of quality time with the new C seats and a brand spankin new 763! ^ Flew the bird out to SFO on its maiden voyage, then got right back on the same one to come home.

My thoughts:

Cabin: One of the things that most surprised me about the new C cabin is how spacious and roomy it feels compared to the old C. When I've looked at seat maps, I've always thought the cabin looked kind of cluttered. In reality, it actually felt very open. It's hard to describe the feeling, but a combination of having fewer seats and having them alternating backwards-forwards makes it seem even more private and spacious. Putting aside the seat for the moment, the experience of riding in the cabin -- if you can believe it -- was overall more relaxing and "luxurious" than I anticipated. I think it's the "non sardine can" effect -- having people facing in different directions, and the asymmetry of the suites themselves, had a very different feel than seeing seats all in a row facing the same direction. Again, it's hard to describe, but the layout didn't at all feel "cookie cutter" and this translated for me into a more open feeling than I'm used to, even more so than the 744's UD.

Another interesting effect is achieved by the seats facing in alternating forwards-backwards directions in the same row. On the way back, SeattleFred and I were both in the same row, on the aisle across from each other, but with seats facing the opposite direction. I think he'd agree with me that this "opposing seats across the aisle" layout was extremely conducive to conversation, much more than sitting next to someone, actually. I've always found it somewhat awkward to have a conversation with a seatmate on a plane when you're both facing forward. You either have to rotate your entire body to face the other, which isn't always practical; you twist your neck, which can be a pain after a while; or you face forward all the time, which is kind of off-putting. Sitting across from each other as we did made conversation much easier.

The only minor minus I can foresee in this cabin is for the pax in 6CH and 9CH -- these are the first and last pair of center suites. There's so much leg room, that, when the seats are not deployed, boarding pax (and others) think it's a good place to cross from one aisle to the other. Not a big deal, but something to keep in mind.

Other than that, it's really hard to stress enough how vastly improved the C cabin is on the new 763. Huge ^ to UA for this!

Seat: I think UA has hit a solid triple with this seat. It's not a home run, as there are some problems with it, but these are minor in comparison to the huge improvements. I get the sense that the negatives are mostly the result of needing to fit more seats in the cabin for revenue reasons, so in that sense I'll take it under the circumstances. I personally loved the seat, but I can tell that it won't be for everyone. To wit:

* The controls take a few minutes to figure out, but they're intuitive and quite easy to use. I especially appreciate them when compared to the ps F/SQ old C seats, which, though easy to switch between upright and wedgie flat, are IMO really difficult to achieve a desired position in between. The controls are of two types. One set of buttons, when held down, move the chair to a specific position. The "plane" button moves the seat to the full upright, the "lounge chair" puts you in an intermediate reclining position, and the "bed," well, you can guess that one. The other set of buttons allows you to change the degree of recline and/or the footrest independently of one another. Sounds simple, right? It is. And yet there's some genius there because somehow, with very little effort, I was consistently able to get the chair into exactly the position I wanted. Doing this with the ps F seat was always a chore, but the ergonomics and controls with the new C seat are dead on. I fooled around with the chair for hours (), and I really was amazed at the ability to get it into just the right place for eating, sleeping, movie watching, reading, etc. How else can I put it? Huge ^.

* The pitch of these seats is something else. I'll try to post some links to photos I took that show the space, but for now let's just say that the amount of "personal space" was considerable. I was surprised at this, again because the seatmaps really look cluttered, but what they don't show is how the new overhead bins are so high up and recessed into the ceiling that even a 6' person could stand in their space without having to duck. I had room to crouch on the ground to tie my shoes. And because no one reclines into your space, that space is yours. (Well, at least in the center seats... More on this in a sec.) As with the feeling in the cabin, I had a very different feeling in the seat than I've had before. My only point of comparison is the old SQ seat, and I can safely say that the new UA C seat feels a lot roomier. Seriously, it was almost more space than I knew what to do with.

* The width, on the other hand, is an issue. Seating upright, I definitely noticed it was narrower than the old C. If you're large, you'll be a little squished in there. Of course you can lower the armrests to buy you a few more inches on either side (well, lots more room on the aisle side, where you can "hang out" if you want), but there's no question that it felt a bit tight. Which I must say was strange: Roomy cabin, lots of pitch...and narrow. UA had to compromise in some places, and this is definitely one of them. It will matter to some more than others for sure, which leads to...

* The bed: In some sense, lie-flat is lie-flat and therefore a huge improvement over the old C. I took a 3-hour nap JFK-SFO that was terrific. But the narrowness I feel made a difference here: I'm a bit broad in the shoulders, so I "hung out" a little over the aisle and came up against the middle barrier as well. In fact, I found sleeping on my back a little constricting: It was fine as long as I didn't try to move. The constriction was exacerbated by the narrow footwell, which forced me to sleep at a slight angle. Obviously if you're shorter and narrower, these things will matter less. But a tall, broad person might feel really tight sleeping on your back. On my side, however, was an entirely different story, and it's here that the seat came unto its own as a bed. Sleeping this way felt completely natural and comfortable -- the slight reduction in body width and length that results from sleeping on my side improved the seat dramatically as a bed. In either position, the back shell of the seat provided a lot of privacy, which made it quieter and more personal. I liked that. Bottom line is that depending on (a) your body size and shape and (b) how you like to sleep, you'll either love or hate this seat as a bed.

I never had much difficulty sleeping in the old C seat -- an Ambien and that barcalounger feeling was all I needed. But the feeling of privacy, of greater personal space, and the ability to actually sit in lots of comfortable positions makes this seat a big winner in my book, especially for longhauls. This kind of surprised me: I thought the bed would be the big thing, but it's the seat and suite that actually made the bigger impression. Again, though, YMMV depending on lots of factors.

Oh, and one more thing: The 2-2-2 layout of the 763 means that the center pair are the only ones with aisle access and no one needs to jump over you. As far as Im concerned, that makes these seats on the 763 better than anything will be on the 772s or 744s.

AVOD: It's kind of hard to know how to rate the new AVOD system. In some ways, it's so unbelievable to have anything like it on a United plane that I hesitate to say anything negative at all. It's so, so much better than the PTV stalks that what more need be said? But here are my thoughts anyway

* The screen is amazing. Period. My jaw literally dropped. At first it seems a bit far from the seat itself, but after watching a few movies it quickly became clear that it was the optimal viewing distance for its size. The quality and size were superb.

* Movie and TV program selection was good not great. I imagine this is something that can be changed over time, so it's nothing I worry about, but only 20-ish movies on a system like this is kind of weak. Same for the TV program selection. Only one episode of 10 different programs seemed like underkill. If I could have watched 10 episodes of The Office, I absolutely would have. But no dice, there was only 1.

* The system is very easy to use, but there were some quirky non-user-friendly aspects to it. For example, at one point I paused a movie to use the lav and to chat with an FA. When I came back 15 minutes later, the movie had come "unpaused," but there was no way to get back to the point at which I had paused it other than rewind...but the fastest rewind speed is x8 -- there's no chapter skip. So it took 3-4 minutes to rewind to the point I wanted. This was a pain. I learned through playing around that what you're supposed to do is stop the movie, then, when you come back, you go to start the movie again, at which point it asks if you'd like to completely restart or just resume from where you left off. Navigating the different menus and submenus is also easy, but again there were some annoying quirks that forced me to backtrack through different menus to get to what I wanted. Nothing major, mind you, but sort of annoying.

My humble thoughts YMMV!
as219 is offline  
Old Jun 8, 2008, 3:22 pm
  #55  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: MileagePlus Premier Gold
Posts: 11,522
Wow, what a thoughtfully-written and thorough review of the seats. Well-done!

I agree with your review in general, particularly about the feeling of luxury, roominess and how modern the cabin looks. Also, I believe you mentioned this, the fact that no one reclines into your space makes your personal space seem infinitely more.
UnitedSkies is offline  
Old Jun 8, 2008, 3:33 pm
  #56  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Programs: UA*Lifetime GS, Hyatt* Lifetime Globalist
Posts: 12,277
Great review! I agree with your assessment of the new C cabin and share your point about the width of the seat.


I am eager to see the photos you took and provide the link in this thread.

Last edited by iluv2fly; Jun 8, 2008 at 3:40 pm Reason: off-topic
UA_Flyer is offline  
Old Jun 8, 2008, 3:41 pm
  #57  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: YYZ
Programs: UA
Posts: 168
Wow, great summary. I agree with just about everything you said -- there are lots of things to love about this seat. The sense of privacy when you're in lie-flat mode really struck me as well -- and likewise, when I wanted to read "in bed," it was great to be able to tilt just the back portion of the seat up a bit and watch the clouds float by. Such a huge improvement.

The only thing that struck me as a weird omission was the lack of any real storage pocket for your personal effects. When I board, I usually have a book, noise-cancelling headphones, and a bottle of water in hand -- in the new C, it was awkward to find space around me for those things. I also noticed the narrowness of the seat, but for whatever reason that didn't really bother me.

By the way, a side note -- I happened to fly Virgin America (in F) for the first time just a few days after flying on the new C, and it seemed to me that the remote for the IFE was _exactly_ the same on the two. Anecdotally, the VX IFE offering seemed to have more movie/TV selections, but I actually found the on-screen interface more annoying than the UA one -- ymmv.

Again, nice review.
mattorb is offline  
Old Jun 8, 2008, 3:47 pm
  #58  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sacramento
Programs: UA 2MM/GS; SPG Lifetime Plat; MHC Lifetime; Tar Heel forever; and I "Dig the Pig" at Piggly Wiggly
Posts: 12,152
Thanks for your summary. I have not flown in the new seats yet, but I have several trips planned for this fall, on which (as of today ) they should have the new config.

^
kevinsac is offline  
Old Jun 8, 2008, 4:56 pm
  #59  
mab
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: SFO, JFK, PHL, etc.
Programs: UA GS 2Million, Marriott PP & LTPP, Amtrak Select Exec
Posts: 337
This is an excellent review, and I mostly agree. (It echo some of the comments I made in my own review a couple months ago, which got burried in a huge, and senselessly combined, thread).

I disagree about the across the aisle facing seats being a plus. It may be great if you know the person sitting there, but it seemed like an invasion of personal space to me. (Fortunately, the cabin was mostly empty when I flew, and so I just switched seats and got much more privacy).

Here's a link to my (small) flickr photo set of the new seats, for those who've not seen them:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mattbla...7604660835448/
mab is offline  
Old Jun 8, 2008, 6:53 pm
  #60  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: BOS
Programs: UA 1K 1.45MM, Marriott+SPG Plat, Clear, Nexus, Global Entry and MEX Viajero Confiable
Posts: 1,777
great review! I can only hope that these eventually make it to the GRU route.
NH_Clark is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.