WaytoomuchEurope

I have taken 2 dozen+ flights in the pods and only had two seat issues*. Your odds are pretty good. Don't stress.



* Don't get me wrong; that's still 2 too many.

YVRtoYYZ

Completely off-topic, but I'm embarking on AC33/34 for the third time in the last four weeks. First flight was deflated both directions, second flight was good (though tail end of 34 it was starting to get squishy), tonight is third flight (AC33) so we shall see.

skybluesea

delete

jc94

skybluesea

delete

canadiancow

Please provide any evidence to support your position.

The only "public" statement from AC is that they're awaiting regulatory approval, which is the "only reason it has taken this long".

YVRtoYYZ

AC33 was deflated today and SD asked me what communique had been coming from AC Corporate on this topic. All I could reference was the info I was given in March.

skybluesea

delete

canadiancow

It's a 15 minute process to fix a broken seat, so there shouldn't be any seats "that routinely fail" if they're being reported correctly. Blocking them from inventory would take longer than fixing them (with another poorly-designed bladder, but at least it would rectify the immediate problem).

Blocking some percent of seats is interesting, but:

1. When do you unblock them? Ever? Or do you let the flight depart with empties? What if you have someone top of the upgrade list who would rather have a deflated J seat than a functional Y/PY seat? While I'd probably take a working PY seat over a deflated J seat on YUL-YYZ, I don't think the same is true for MUC-YYZ.

2. My TPE-YVR had at least 3 seats deflated. I can't remember the aircraft type, but this was 3/5 in our group. As I believe I stated in the opening post in this thread, the bigger issue is that most people aren't aware of the issue, even when they're experiencing it. So having an open seat might rectify the issue for all us FTers, but it won't help the people who have no idea what it's supposed to feel like.

canopus27

... especially if I have my own air mattress with me

I'm flying YYZ-FCO this weekend. If AC come up to me before the flight and say that "your seat is deflated, so we're going to refund your e-ups and move you back to Y" .... I'm going to decline that "refund" offer and happily take my pancake seat in J - with some proper food, some reasonable wine, some decent space, and a place to sleep with my inflated mattress underneath me.

I don't want to come across as minimizing the downside of a deflated seat. I'm just observing that:
Inflated J seat > deflated J seat > normal Y seat

skybluesea

delete

Transpacificflyer

And you accept the airline statement at face value? For someone who is pretty quick to challenge the airline when you feel you have been mistreated, I am surprised that you are so trusting. The issue isn't simply one of regulatory approval as there is an existing APPROVED solution and that is the use of seat mattresses. All fabric and materials used in aircraft related products requires fire rating certification and the fabric fibres and mattress material is already found onboard aircraft in the seats, carpets and cushions.

Transport Canada has fast track procedures to address urgent issues and the two years+ delay is far beyond what could be reasonably expected for a simple onboard issue. I believe that AC misjudged the extent of the defect and that the seat supplier and airline had an extensive period of going back and forth on the issue in respect to paying for the cost of repair and compensation to customers. This would also involve the seat supplier product liability insurer(s). Because this is aviation related, it falls under the purview of the aircraft liability insurers who are predominately London and Bermuda based. Overall, the aviation insurance market is difficult now. The Lloyds market has become particularly nasty in the past year. Even in good years, Lloyds syndicates can be difficult when making a claim. I would expect that there is a dispute over coverage too as the product liability may not fully address a design error and omission. The manufacturer would have needed manufacturer's E&O coverage. It's an expensive coverage and big limits are not easily placed. The point being that the "fix" may not have been agreed upon until it was decided or agreed upon as to who was paying. This aspect of the issue may not even be resolved. However, I do not see AC simply giving $1000 compensation unless it was certain that the cost could be charged back. As wonderful as Calin and Company are, the airline isn't a benevolent fund.
For reference sake, I draw your attention to the most recent crisis of Takata airbags in multiple vehicle models. Despite vehicles manufactured as far back as 2000 having the defect, most of the vehicle recalls started in 2018. The number of repairs was so overwhelming that car dealers had to delay the fix. The defective aircraft seat issue may be much more extensive than we are aware of, and the airline must find a way to pull aircraft from service to fix the issue with a minimum of disruption. The loss of the 737 Max aircraft hasn't helped the capacity exposure either.

Adam Smith

How, exactly, to determine whether one got what one paid for? AC got me to my destination; both of my deflated flights were early, in fact. Food and wine were mediocre, but same as always. The first time I had a deflated seat, the SD was great about it (well, she was great at everything), so service was good on that flight. No issues with baggage delivery. IFE worked. And so on...

It's interesting to me that AC seems to have set the compensation formula pretty purely on distance. I suppose it's a simple and consistent way to do it, but the level to which I'm aggrieved, and feel that compensation is owed, is probably also heavily dependent on (a) how much of the seat was deflated, (b) whether I was trying to sleep, and (c) how much I paid.

In that sense, the $500 I got for YYC-FRA a few months ago felt like it might be too little - rather than the solid 4-5 hours of sleep I usually get on those flights, I mostly got tossing and turning. The whole seat was pancaked, which was extremely uncomfortable for my whole body. I actually moved from my seat to another deflated seat that had been blocked pre-flight because it was deflated, but it was less deflated than mine (and would hold air after a reset much longer). It was still fully deflated and crappy, just less awful. $500 didn't feel like a lot. Slightly offsetting that, it was a fairly cheap P fare, so $500 actually would have represented most of the fare difference between Standard and Business (pro-rated by mileage for that segment) when I bought it, so AC could argue it was reasonable.

On 34 the other day, it was only the upper lumbar, so my butt and lower back were mostly okay. Discomfort was mostly isolated to upper back/shoulders. And with 11:10AM departure, I probably wasn't going to try to sleep, even though it's a long flight. So my inconvenience was significantly less. The ticket was much more expensive, but I'm not too unhappy with the $1000. I would have rather just had a seat that worked the whole time, of course.

So, overall, I would say that AC has given me enough compensation that it hasn't felt like it would be worth my while to try to fight them for more. And, relative to the ticket prices, neither of those amounts were "crumbs". Now, had I been flying YYC-LHR last-minute on an $8000 fare and had a deflated seat, perhaps $500 would have been "crumbs". But not in the times I've had it.

The thing that bothers me more than the quantity is the form of compensation. I'm already having trouble figuring out how to use all of these stupid codes, and I haven't even had that many problems. At some point, I would probably want hard dollars back rather than future travel credit.

That's a 789, so minimum 10% of the J cabin. Agree with the other point though - in hindsight, I'm quite certain that I had a seat that was at least partially deflated a couple years ago (before this thread existed), but didn't know what it was at the time. I assumed maybe I just should have played around more with the mattress firmness.

That's deflated J seat with inflatable mattress though, right? Where would you rank it for someone who didn't have one of those?

canopus27

Correct. And yes, it's a tougher question to answer if you don't have an inflatable mattress ... as you observed in your post, it's a combination of lots of factors - including whether or not you're trying to sleep.

This entire question came up in the context of "Should AC refuse to sell deflated seats?", and my observation is that a blanket ban on selling deflated J seats is not entirely black & white ... there may be circumstances and individuals who would still choose a deflated J over some of the other alternatives (ranging from a Y seat to a conceivable IDB)

skybluesea

delete