Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Inaugural AA963 777-300ER / 77W DFW-GRU 31 Jan 2013 (photos)

 
Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 1, 2013, 12:04 am
  #91  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Orange County
Programs: AAdvantage Platinum & Hilton HHonors Silver
Posts: 52
Inaugural AA963 777-300ER / 77W DFW-GRU 31 Jan 2012 (photos)

So was this all a lie then??

" All of these features, including individual 110v universal AC power outlets and USB jacks, will be available at every seat and every cabin on our new planes"

http://www.aa.com/i18n/urls/newplanes.jsp
D-Town714 is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 12:35 am
  #92  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,129
Looking at the pictures, theres definitely an outlet built into every Y seat.
jpetekYXMD80 is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 1:10 am
  #93  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northeast Kansas | Colorado Native
Programs: Amex Gold/Plat, UA *G, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott LT Gold, NEXUS, TSA Disparager Unobtanium
Posts: 21,606
Originally Posted by billycwhatup
I thought there was wifi internationally on these birds? No wifi logo on the flight status.
There is wifi on the inaugural flight. There have been several posts in the FB EXP group from pax currently aboard the 77W.
FriendlySkies is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 1:34 am
  #94  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,421
Originally Posted by AZbba
I agree, the first seats look a bit disappointing. I was hoping they would do something like CA's new 77W's which I would rate at or above CX's.


CX seat however is much much wider as there are only 6 seats- also the CX seat is more open and balances privacy with airiness some of these other BOX cabins look extremely claustrophobic
Kachjc is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 1:38 am
  #95  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,421
seems like AA has taken heaps of cues from CX -well this certainly does increase the Quality gap between Oneworld and the others
Kachjc is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 4:19 am
  #96  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Long Beach, CA
Programs: DL DM
Posts: 5,292
We need to remember that 10-across delivers a significantly lower CASM versus 9-across. The 77W will be excellent for the heavy hub to hub e.g. DFW-LHR routes that can use the extra capacity.


LOL....then stack Y passengers like logs on top of each other, or develop a standing harness where we can put them 12 across and two high. That will bring down CASM too. Fact is, AA has adopted the WORST Y cabin of any US-based carrier in the 777. If I were DL or UA, I'd pee all over AA's parade with this one. The Y cabin horror has been widely-ignored by AA, and fact is that is where most of its passengers will fly.

Last edited by bubbashow; Feb 1, 2013 at 4:59 am
bubbashow is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 4:23 am
  #97  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ireland
Programs: BA Gold, A3 Gold, BD..oh, wait..
Posts: 4,045
Just saw the photos. Am I the only one who thinks the aisles in Y look horrifically narrow? How is any non-anorexic person supposed to walk without slamming into every person sitting in an aisle seat?
Looking at the MC photos, the seating design and layout reminds me of TAM's 77W's (which are also 3-4-3. Having flown them, I didn't think they were all that bad in the end. Yes the aisles were a bit narrower, I'm not stick thin (even less so then) but I still managed to get back and forth
colmc is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 5:39 am
  #98  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Programs: BA GGL, AA 1MM LT GLD, SPG PLAT, National Exec Selc, Hilton Diamond, Hyatt Plat, Marriott Silver
Posts: 8,278
Originally Posted by bubbashow
We need to remember that 10-across delivers a significantly lower CASM versus 9-across. The 77W will be excellent for the heavy hub to hub e.g. DFW-LHR routes that can use the extra capacity.


LOL....then stack Y passengers like logs on top of each other, or develop a standing harness where we can put them 12 across and two high. That will bring down CASM too. Fact is, AA has adopted the WORST Y cabin of any US-based carrier in the 777. If I were DL or UA, I'd pee all over AA's parade with this one. The Y cabin horror has been widely-ignored by AA, and fact is that is where most of its passengers will fly.
And the majority of Y passengers whine and moan about bad service and delays and so on over and over yet continually go running back to the cheapest carrier. And carriers who have tried to get a premium for Y have failed nearly every time. That is the impetus for creating another class - premium economy which caters to those Y passengers who will pay something for a better experience. Wish AA had gone that route but MCE is something.

The reason UA and DL aren't pissing on them is because they are probably considering the same.
sts603 is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 6:52 am
  #99  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Long Beach, CA
Programs: DL DM
Posts: 5,292
[QUOTE=sts603;20165087] but MCE is something. QUOTE]

...sure is.....standard coach on other carriers.
bubbashow is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 7:02 am
  #100  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: SFO
Programs: AA ExPlat; UA GS (via MM companion); SPG
Posts: 362
[QUOTE=bubbashow;20165374]
Originally Posted by sts603
but MCE is something. QUOTE]

...sure is.....standard coach on other carriers.
What other carriers have MCE seat pitch in standard coach?
flyer215 is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 7:37 am
  #101  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Left
Programs: FT
Posts: 7,285
Originally Posted by hillrider
Thanks for the report. The flight is far from sold out (except for F, where I guess it's filled with AA mgt and invitees): J7 R7 D1 I0 Y7 B7 H7 K7 M7 L0 V0 G0 S0 N0 Q0 O0. From the seatmap, there are 9 unassigned seats.

That's because it's the same exact seat, the Cirrus by Sicma/Zodiac designed by JPA design. Having flown it, I like it. A whole lot., actually a ton. I would not be surprised if it's the best J seat in the sky at the moment; finally AA made a correct decision after the 1996 fiasco of the current J seats.
Me too...love CX J seats, going to love burning BA miles on J on AA too!!!!

Y, yikes...10 seats. bloody awful.
mkjr is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 7:41 am
  #102  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Programs: BA GGL, AA 1MM LT GLD, SPG PLAT, National Exec Selc, Hilton Diamond, Hyatt Plat, Marriott Silver
Posts: 8,278
[QUOTE=bubbashow;20165374]
Originally Posted by sts603
but MCE is something. QUOTE]

...sure is.....standard coach on other carriers.
Standard coach width. Extra leg room.

As I said I wish AA had gone to a full Premium Economy - more width, extra leg room, better service. But alas, we got MCE. But still it provides the Y passenger who is willing to spend a little more the option to get something more comfortable while still maintaining high-density good-for-CASM seating in most of Y.

People forget that 10 across on the 777 is not a new invention but was always an option since Boeing started marketing the plane. And I think the Japanese domestic 777s have always been 10 across.
sts603 is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 7:43 am
  #103  
dw
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: NYC/LA
Programs: DL Plat, AA Plat Pro, Marriott Titanium, IHG Diamond Amb
Posts: 7,489
Originally Posted by sts603
And the majority of Y passengers whine and moan about bad service and delays and so on over and over yet continually go running back to the cheapest carrier. And carriers who have tried to get a premium for Y have failed nearly every time. That is the impetus for creating another class - premium economy which caters to those Y passengers who will pay something for a better experience. Wish AA had gone that route but MCE is something.
Totally agree. Unfortunately this is compounded by the fact that corporate travel policies have become stingier and some (myself included) are often restricted to booking the cheapest non-stop flight, regardless of carrier. (Which options are clearly pointed out when using our mandated travel booking tool through CWT.) MRTC didn't work in the past b/c people weren't willing to pay for it; with today's corporate travel policies, even if some people were willing to pay a bit more to fly on an airline with a more comfortable Y product, they might not be able to.
dw is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 7:49 am
  #104  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 168
Originally Posted by dw
Totally agree. Unfortunately this is compounded by the fact that corporate travel policies have become stingier and some (myself included) are often restricted to booking the cheapest non-stop flight, regardless of carrier. (Which options are clearly pointed out when using our mandated travel booking tool through CWT.) MRTC didn't work in the past b/c people weren't willing to pay for it; with today's corporate travel policies, even if some people were willing to pay a bit more to fly on an airline with a more comfortable Y product, they might not be able to.
This is precisely the case for me too.
Umrswimr is offline  
Old Feb 1, 2013, 7:51 am
  #105  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Programs: JAL Global Club & oneworld Sapphire, ANA SFC & Star Alliance Gold
Posts: 3,747
Originally Posted by sts603
And the majority of Y passengers whine and moan about bad service and delays and so on over and over yet continually go running back to the cheapest carrier. And carriers who have tried to get a premium for Y have failed nearly every time.
Personally I think this notion that Y pax will endure any level of discomfort and bad service for a cheaper fare is hogwash. Let's not forget that it was Gordon Bethune who, in facing down the bean counters, said, "You can make a pizza so cheap that no one will want to eat it."
Unimatrix One is offline  


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.