Jul 27, 2016, 1:19 am
Last edit by: Genius1
BOEING 787–9
•Seatplan:
•Aircraft:
G–ZBKA Delivered
G–ZBKB Delivered
G–ZBKC Delivered
G–ZBKD Delivered
G–ZBKE Delivered
G–ZBKF Delivered
G–ZBKG Delivered
G–ZBKH Delivered
G–ZBKI Delivered
G–ZBKJ Delivered
G–ZBKK Delivered
G–ZBKL Delivered
G–ZBKM Delivered
G–ZBKN Delivered
G–ZBKO Delivered
G–ZBKP Delivered
G–ZBKR Delivered
G–ZBKS Delivered
•Seatplan:
•Aircraft:
G–ZBKA Delivered
G–ZBKB Delivered
G–ZBKC Delivered
G–ZBKD Delivered
G–ZBKE Delivered
G–ZBKF Delivered
G–ZBKG Delivered
G–ZBKH Delivered
G–ZBKI Delivered
G–ZBKJ Delivered
G–ZBKK Delivered
G–ZBKL Delivered
G–ZBKM Delivered
G–ZBKN Delivered
G–ZBKO Delivered
G–ZBKP Delivered
G–ZBKR Delivered
G–ZBKS Delivered
BA's 787-9
May 7, 2015, 2:54 am
#16
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 4,029
I think I read something recently on here about some 777s not having 2 F seats because BA hadn't measured the cabins properly so instead having an ugly boxed off crew rest area. Can't find the thread though...
Edit: may have found the thread, but it makes no mention of measuring cabin so not sure about that recollection...
Edit 2: relevant seatmap
Edit: may have found the thread, but it makes no mention of measuring cabin so not sure about that recollection...
Edit 2: relevant seatmap
Otherwise how would you explain the planes that have 2 more seats where the crew rest area is on the ones you're mentioning?
May 7, 2015, 2:57 am
#17
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 5,380
May 7, 2015, 3:01 am
#18
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,641
Unlike French, English is not a prescriptive language; there is correct grammar, and then there are those who choose to opt out and create their own "style" (for instance in the US, the plural set out by Ldnn1 would be OK, though not ideal, to use).
The Economist's style guide (which I take to be the arbiter on such matters) is firmly in the camp of collective nouns taking the singular, and that is (not are) the norm for corporate comms in the UK and Australia:
"A government, a party, a company (whether Tesco or Marks and Spencer) and a partnership (Skidmore, Owings & Merrill) are all it and take a singular verb. So does a country, even if its name looks plural."
www.economist.com/style-guide/singular-or-plural
Of course people is free to choose to be different, but it's (not its!) important that people is armed with the knowledge of what are technically correct. But as you'll have just noted, it is annoying when people get it wrong!
Just because something is in "common usage" doesn't mean it is correct. It is not, and it's total nonsense to suggest that the police is the only collective noun which takes a singular verb. A little learning.....
The Economist's style guide (which I take to be the arbiter on such matters) is firmly in the camp of collective nouns taking the singular, and that is (not are) the norm for corporate comms in the UK and Australia:
"A government, a party, a company (whether Tesco or Marks and Spencer) and a partnership (Skidmore, Owings & Merrill) are all it and take a singular verb. So does a country, even if its name looks plural."
www.economist.com/style-guide/singular-or-plural
Of course people is free to choose to be different, but it's (not its!) important that people is armed with the knowledge of what are technically correct. But as you'll have just noted, it is annoying when people get it wrong!
Just because something is in "common usage" doesn't mean it is correct. It is not, and it's total nonsense to suggest that the police is the only collective noun which takes a singular verb. A little learning.....
Last edited by oscietra; May 7, 2015 at 3:45 am
May 7, 2015, 3:13 am
#19
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ipswich
Posts: 7,543
Agreed, I was researching this very point recently. Both forms are in common and acceptable usage these days, with the only notable exception being 'the police' which is never used with the singular form "the police is looking for..."
May 7, 2015, 3:39 am
#20
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,771
May 7, 2015, 5:27 am
#25
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,771
May 7, 2015, 5:31 am
#27
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: London
Programs: BA Silver, ZSL Silver
Posts: 2,552
I thought there were more, but these were two close-ups that were knocking about a while ago:
http://www.businesstraveller.com/new...7-9-dreamliner
The quote from FvdP is vague though - 'new' or 'further development':
"The new cabin on the 787-900 is a further development, which we think our customers will love. It will feel exceptionally elegant and beautifully British — exactly what our customers ask of us."
http://www.businesstraveller.com/new...7-9-dreamliner
The quote from FvdP is vague though - 'new' or 'further development':
"The new cabin on the 787-900 is a further development, which we think our customers will love. It will feel exceptionally elegant and beautifully British — exactly what our customers ask of us."
May 7, 2015, 5:50 am
#28
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: London
Programs: BA Gold, Subcard
Posts: 435
May 7, 2015, 6:06 am
#30
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: London
Programs: BAEC Silver
Posts: 772
Perhaps this concept for CW which was posted on here a few months back?
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-F...s800/seats.png
It is the current setup with what looks like the same seating density but with the seats angled slightly differently so as to give direct aisle access to all passengers. Strictly speaking not a new seat, just a tweak on the major flaw in the current seat in today's market which is no direct aisle access.
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-F...s800/seats.png
It is the current setup with what looks like the same seating density but with the seats angled slightly differently so as to give direct aisle access to all passengers. Strictly speaking not a new seat, just a tweak on the major flaw in the current seat in today's market which is no direct aisle access.