Originally Posted by
KeaauFlyer
Publication of said specs would provide clarity, wouldn't it? My cynicism about this comes from the fact that if the specs were flattering, they almost certainly would have been published by HA. Of course, one does wonder how the AP and Star-Advertiser reached their conclusion. Better journalism would have provided some frame of reference.
Ultimately, this won't matter for most of us because there is really very little choice in interisland carriers in any practical sense. We take what HA gives us.
Indeed, better journalism is always nice. Specs would have been great, but even then those could be used to fuel wild negative speculation. Already, the numbers provided have painted a negative picture. Going from 118 or 123 seats to 128 seats? OMG! The sky is falling. But when you take a look at what's really going on, only a handful of planes were in the 118 configuration and had a closet and lavatory upfront. Removing those, frees up lots of space to add 2 rows, or 10 seats. The other planes are really only seeing one row added, with space made available by the thinner profile of the new seat. In the end, most people really don't care about the specs, since most people gloss over the fine details anyhow. All people want to know is how this refurbishing will affect them and HAL has said the design is meant to not reduce onboard comfort. The average consumer doesn't care to learn the details or find the "why" in matters of the business. They just want the cheapest seats. Ultimately, the flights are incredibly short and these seats and new configuration are ideal for the 717 mission. I'm a glass half full sort of person and try not to find the negative spin in matters that surround me. I tend to not find the worst in things until I can experience them for myself and draw my own conclusions. That view, is the genesis for my devils advocate approach in this thread. Having sat in the seat helps too.