Flying Machine

New to AC! I’m a UA Platinum MM.. I have some flights in late September and early October SFO YYZ ZRH on AC Metal. I chose those because they were on the 787‘s both Dash 8–9.
Intra European is on LX


Now I need to come back from MAD in early October and recently had a schedule change with a forced overnight in YYZ.(original flights were on the 787‘s via MUC)

Wanted to stay on AC metal as I’m crediting to UA. Am I reading correctly that the choice of the AC premium flyers are the 787‘s first, followed by the A330s ??

Are both the equipment types all in the new J cabin. Bottom line if you were going over the water to YYZ then from YYZ to SFO what would be the best aircraft to travel in J? 787 first then A330?

Thanks in advance

Adam Smith

Many have yet to fly the new 333 product, since it was rolled out during COVID and there were only 1-2 aircraft with it for a long time.

The 787 fleet has only ever had one cabin type. The 333 fleet may or may not be, but if they're not already all gone, you're unlikely to get stuck with the old product in October.

You can find my views on the new 333 back in the 333 refurb thread. But yes, I would certainly say the 787 is better.

That being said, I probably wouldn't go very far out of my way to pick one versus the other. Although I've yet to do an overnight flight in the new 333 pods. For MAD-YYZ-SFO (daytime TATL where I'm not trying to sleep), I'd go more on schedule.

HerpaYvr

The 787 hard product is better as you have more room.

On June 1st I flew YUL-YVR on the converted ex TAP 333 (C-GEGP) with the Star Alliance Livery and the suit is smaller than the 777 or 787 j suits. You also have the stupid over the shoulder lap belt

I sat in 4K and it was just smaller, less space than the other aircraft

The Lev

787 has higher cabin humidity and greater cabin pressure which helps with jet lag. Flight times are a bit shorter as it flies faster and handles turbulence a bit better. 330 is a bit quieter.

Adam Smith

In theory, yes, but in practice, I don't think so. Speed on the NAT tracks or other corridors may be governed by ATC or other factors. AC doesn't block shorter times for 787s vs 333s (or 777s). So in theory a 787 might be <15 minutes quicker on MUC-YYZ, but I doubt that gets realized very often. I would also note that when I compare my 787 flights to my flights on other widebodies, either on TATLs or TCONs, for the same route, the 787 doesn't have any advantage in flight times, suggesting that ground handling, gate availability, weather, etc end up outweighing the slightly faster cruise speed.

It's likely that @Flying Machine's choice of connecting point will have a far more significant influence on the total journey time than the type of equipment, so I wouldn't be factoring that theoretical speed advantage in to my decision.

The Lev

On trans-ocean routes there are "fast lanes" and "slow lanes". President of Canadian explained to me one time why AC had made the wrong decision going with 343 vs. 747 because the (faster) 747's got the better lanes across the Pacific.

I know that on some of my regular routes across the Atlantic the block time is shorter in years with the 787 vs. other years with 333. If the route is consistently flown by the 787 they will set it up with shorter block time than if flown with 333/777.

ride red

The centre dividers go down in the 330, making it better if travelling as a couple and booking a middle pair.

canadiancow

I don't know if that would be enough for me to not take a 787.

NA-Flyer

I flew Air Canada 789 and 773 and both are nice aircrafts.

My preference goes to the 789 as it is quite and has less feeling of shaking when encountering turbulence.

vinnmann

The new 333 J seats don't have the inflatable cushions. Considering how often I read complaints of broken/deflated seats, the 333 wins that category.