meeeeeep

My wife and I and our 4-year-old son need to fly from YVR to LHR. I'm thinking of using points to book business class seats on one of the newly refurbished 77Ws, which have the same business class seating as the 787s.

What's the best plan for seating in the business class cabin? I gather that the divider between the middle rows can't be dropped. Does it therefore make sense to do an L-shape with our son in one aisle seat, me directly behind him and my wife directly across from him? Other suggestions?

Is putting a 4-year-old into one of these new pods a bad idea altogether? The hour of the flight makes me hope that he'll sleep for most of it...

Silvercity

My 3.5yr daughter has been on 6 International flights with me and her mom. Best way is to have your child in front of you or you wife and then the other sit accross. Just like a triangle.

Stranger

What status does the OP have? What makes him think he'll be able to find two J seats on a YVR-LHR slaveship?

Is this one year from now, or is he SE?

Premiere Elite - YEG

At that age it might work, but as a father of two young boys (3 & 6) who has flown with them too many times (domestic J, pods, and Y), my suggestion for you would be premium economy. Even with a well behaved child, being seated in the same row is essential to cutting down the distractions to other passengers while offering the least stress to Mom and little meeep. That business class layout is better than the pods for kid travel but you will still irritate the neighbours and junior won't be as happy as he would seated at your hip.

Premiere Elite - YEG

These questions don't really matter in terms of the OP's query. Assume he can get seats and help or desist.

cooleddie

How about a triangle formation at first row of business class cabin or at the last row of the business class cabin?

BRAISKI

A 4 yr old in J can be challenging. Both parents will ALWAYS be peeping, checking or looking at him. You guys will be restless. You might as well book PY/PE as you can sit in a row. The Refurb 777 has 4 seats in the middle while the 787 has 3.

Wpgjetse

I think he needs 3 seats, making it even harder.

expert7700

Air Canada requires that a child sit in a pod directly in front of a parent.

Also, you cannot occupy a pod next to the child (regardless of the divider coming down like on a Classic Pod, or fixed divider on a Executive Pod). Assistance / evacuation reasons I presume.

We have had our seats reassigned so that our son was in front of me before, and I have heard the service directors insist on following the second rule to upset parents. Surprisingly (to me), contract agents in NRT caught the issue with my son and I before boarding began.

jazzsax

OPs concern here should not be what is least distracting for everyone else. It's pretty obvious why everyone is already saying to sit in PY. Y'all would rather kids not be up front.

I certainly hope the OP has three seats in J. I wouldn't be surprised if their child was better behaved than some of the SE's on the same flight.

rehoult

Pretty much this.

Your child must be in front of one of the parents. The other parent can be wherever you want. I'd recommend they take the seat across the aisle from the child so they can see each other and help them out. The parent in the seat behind will have a very hard time seeing or (hopefully) hearing the child, so is really only there because Air Canada insists.

It's a truly useless rule for everyone. It leaves the child unable to see their parent, and doesn't even help in an emergency as you'd have to undo your seatbelt to help them with anything, regardless of whether you were seating behind or beside them.

yyznomad

I think the OP was referring to the new Dream Cabin refurb 777s that will be on yvr lhr soon if not already.

ACYYZ/SD

Actually it's a Transport Canada requirement and the operator (AC) is mandated to comply. With two Parents and a Child, the "triangle" strategy (Post 2) works well.

rehoult

I'm integrated by that as Transport Canada has very few hard and fast requirements when it comes to passenger seating Most requirements affecting passenger behaviour come from the airline SOPs, FAMs, etc.. which are approved by TC, and then must be followed by the airline in order to retain certification/pass inspection.

The classic example was when AC had permission to have mobile devices on after landing, when WS didn't yet. If you asked WS, they said "It's a TC requirement", but that was complete bull. It was the approved company SOP, that by law they had to follow. They were right that it was a rule, but it wasn't a TC rule, and TC would have (and did) approve a change as soon as it was requested.

So is the requirement for a parent to sit behind the child in the CARs? Or is it an AC rule that has been accepted by Transport? Not that is means it can be ignored (it absolutely can't be), but they are not the same thing.

Sorry to be picky, but "the Government says so" is a massively overused excuse in general, and even more so in the aviation world.

YQMYMM

That is a TC rule in the CARs.

705.40(4) For the purposes of section 602.08, no air operator shall permit the use of a portable electronic device on board an aircraft unless the air operator has established procedures that

(a) meet the Commercial Air Service Standards; and

(b) are specified in the air operator’s company operations manual.

Until the operator establishes and has a procedure approved, you cannot use a portable electronic device. Last time I flew Canadian North, you still couldn't use a PED during taxi, takeoff or landing.


As for having a parent sitting behind the child would fall under
CAR605.21(3)(a) Every passenger who is responsible for a person who is using a child restraint system on board an aircraft shall be seated in a seat adjacent to the seat to which the child restraint system is secured

I would assume TC interprets 'adjacent' as the pod behind the child due to the sideways orientation of the seat in the pods.