KARFA

yes i think the first photo in this thread is clearly from an internal document - it's not the type of drawing that would be in a patent application - and I can imagine there would be concern at any company where something like that was made public without permission. I can't remember if there was also a patent application that was related to that iteration of the seat though - if so that would have been published anyway about 18 months after filing.

orbitmic

But that's the thing - the examples that you provide are all about different airlines reacting differently to similar problems than BA did! I don't understand why you are surprised that this will lead to different reactions. Have you looked at the thread on the new JFK CW service? Bar a couple of exceptions, the mood on the changes introduced in the Autumn have been extremely positive, because what BA did has been very good. And similarly the new thread on WT improvements? Again, positive reactions to a positive product. How do you explain that those very same people who are, for some of them, unhappy with the CW seat or the F ground product are happy about the new JFK CW meal bedding if they are hopelessly biased against BA anyway? Should they not say that it is horrible? Conversely since you primarily mention the AA forum as point of reference, have you seen locals' reactions when they do not get their choice of pre-flight drink or upgrades don't work out or with the way they aren't spared by the new basic fares? In what sense exactly are they more lenient than on the BA forum with regards to policies they consider below par?

The other point you are making is that people on this forum are unreasonable because they do not - effectively - understand the economic constraints that BA is faced with. Two things on that though. Flyertalk is called "Flyer" talk for a reason. People on this site are reacting as passengers not as shareholder, Maybe somewhere, out there, there is a webforum for BA shareholders where they can discuss the best ways for BA to increase profit but this is not it. I'm sure there is also ample intranet where employees look at other crucial aspects of the airline operation, but again, this is a forum for travellers to exchange information, perceptions, knowledge, and opinion about travel. That is what they do, and there is basically no reason why they should mince their words against any given travel provider when they consider that their experience falls short.

Also, do you have the impression that this is BA forum specific? That posters on other fora are, somehow, discounting 'financial realities' more than here? If anything my impressionistic feeling is the opposite, I keep reading this argument here that BA is and must remain profitable, which is fine, far more than I see it on the other fora I am a frequent reader (and sometimes poster) in. Again, I do not see the basis for a differentiated bias against BA vs other airlines.



So effectively you are suggesting that we should only discuss things on which there is unanimity of perceptions? What exactly would those be? I mean which aspects of air travel do not see people having different preferences, priorities, or indeed indifference curves? Again, FT is about exchanging information and knowledge but also opinions, which by nature are not unanimous. And the fact that there is no unanimity does not, in any way, suggest that people are indifferent. As I mentioned, at the time when AF was discussing its change of J seats, there were a number of posters who were dead opposed to moving to fully flat seats. They were very articulate and detailed in the reasoning behind their preference, and why not, it is perfectly their right, but that doesn't mean that you can just throw back to back supporters and opponents of flat beds in J as though since not everyone agrees then it makes no difference what the airline does. Same goes here: sure, some people prefer Y seats that do not recline, some prefer J seats that have no direct aisle access, some people prefer a cheap and cheerful F cabin with less frills but plenty of upgrade opportunities. All of that is fine, and conversely, some people prefer more pitch and recline in Y, full aisle access from all seats and exclusive service in F including AF-style ground service and luxurious food and bedding onboard even if this involves limiting seat offer and availability of deeply discounted promotional fares. Why should those different opinions not be exchanged and why should this forum not take stock of how its members feel? It's worth what it's worth and you are still free to completely disagree with the people you were disagreeing with in the first place, but I find accusations of bias/moaning/unreasonableness against those who are unhappy just as unhelpful and counter-productive as accusations of being 'apologists' or corruption against those who say that they are happy with BA. Quite frankly, both merely reflect on the strength of the perceptions of the commentator rather than the nature of the opinions of those who are being criticised.

Andriyko

Sorry, I am not sure which examples that I provided your post was about? Had you read the discussion about delays and cancellations over at the AA forum you'd have understood what I was talking about. I was surprised that the discussion there ended quietly with the acceptance that it was weather, that it made no sense for DFW to have de-icing capability of an airport that sees icy conditions on a much greater number of days and that airlines were limited in their ability to deal with the situation; whereas here it continued for days about how BA did not move heaven and earth to operate flights. This reads to me like different reactions to the same situation and the same response. The same applies to MCE - I can not see how AA making MCE ten abreast is different from BA doing the same in economy? Reading here how much people love MCE and how they would always choose AA over BA because of MCE, I do not see posts slamming AA for the decision. In general, I did not see posts by regulars here in any of the discussions I referred to in the threads that I mentioned. I am not sure what is that you are trying to convince me of. I read other forums, I can see what is going on here, and I make my own conclusions,. If you see things differently and think that there is no anti-BA bias, that's fine. I don't have to change my mind to conform to your views. And neither is it my intention to change yours. This discussion is rather bizarre as you see some examples (that airlines react differently to the same problems) that I never put forward; quite to the contrary I was talking about airlines reacting in the same manner to the same issues. But you go on talking about something that I never said.

And, 'economic constraints?' Where did that come from? Did you mean to respond to someone else?

What? I did not suggest any such thing. Again, you take my words, misconstrue them and then theorize about something that I never intended to say. If you wanted to talk about discussing only the things we agree on, please do not use a quote of mine to start that conversation. I do not want to be a part thereof.

orbitmic

I'm sorry if I misunderstood your point below:



I thought you meant that it was a futile exercise to compare the 'product' as we all value different things, which I understood to mean that it would only not be futile to talk about things where we value the same thing, but you probably meant something else.

For the rest, I have seen most of the discussions that you are referring to and simply completely disagree with your interpretation of them. I would add that I have certainly not seen huge discussion of the move to 10 abreast on this forum compared to what occurred, at the time, on the EK and AF-KL forum to name but two, quite the contrary, most people seem to have just expected it and taken it for granted. Exactly the same about the reduction of TPs for domestic F last year which ended up being accepted pretty quickly by most despite affecting many negatively.

Finally, I can assure you that I am not trying to convince you of anything. You are clearly persuaded that this forum is suffering from some inbuilt anti-BA prejudice, which is entirely your right; I happen to think that you are completely wrong, but I am certainly not trying to convince you of it.

V10

I don't for one minute believe that there is a systemic anti-BA bias on this forum.

If we're prepared to consider the possibility that some posters are biased towards posting anti-BA sentiments that are detrimental to the forum as a whole, then we have to be equally open to the possibility of pro-BA bias from other posters that are similarly unhelpful to the overall tone of the forum as a whole.

RG1X

I'm probably in a hard minority here, but I'd be happy with the current CW seats if only they all had direct aisle access. I hate being stepped over, and I hate stepping over people. Oh, and a better IFE screen... the one they currently use is garbage (good luck watching a subtitled film)

I can't say I've really minded being window vs not.

Andriyko

I wrote that my post was not about comparing products because I thought that it was a futile exercise, and yet comparing products is exactly what you decided to focus on and respond to by singling out that sentence. And even if I think that a discussion is a futile exercise I never said that one should not take place or that we should talk only about certain things. You put those words into my mouth. I am happy to participate in a discussion even if no one's mind will be changed. Again, you talked about something that I never said or meant to say. And, if you thought that I was 'effectively suggesting that we should only discuss things on which there is unanimity of perceptions', you could have asked first before writing a post explaining how wrong my suggestion was.

V10

The one thing I do regret from my sole pair of flights in CW is not taking a window seat, on reflection. The aisles felt quite exposed and I found that quite uncomfortable. I'd rather the privacy and have to step over something to reach the aisle than be more "open"; a window seat with direct aisle access would be the ideal proposition. On the other hand not being in an aisle seat in WTP or WT was enough to pretty much ruin a flight for me.

Agree that the old IFE system is absolute garbage and should have been consigned to a museum years ago.

RG1X

My favourite seat is the backwards facing type, window, with bulkhead. I felt pretty cocooned in there.

I'm not overly concerned about any lack of privacy though tbh.

Jimmie76

I can't see anything other than text on the linked pages on my tablet. Any idea what I'm doing wrong?

T8191

And there lies the dichotomy.

My wife likes being 'tucked away' in a window seat, whereas I'm perfectly happy in the aisle.
And on AA A330 ex-DUB, in the 1-2-1 in J, we're both VERY happy in our exclusive individual window seats [the only time I ever get one!]

orbitmic

go to the left side menu and click 'original document' and all should be revealed!

Jimmie76

Thank you!

Prospero

Has no-one else here spotted that the seat described in the paddleyourownkanoo article shared here by Foofighter69 on 5 January and allegedly killed off by BA management is the same seat contained in the October 2017 patent application?

MPH1980

But neither of the patents listed as October 2017 are *actually* October 2017. As Karfa pointed out - the top one is 2015 and the second one (when you look at the original document) is 2014 in terms of when they were filed. They've just come to light now through their granting dates - that's all.

It looks like 2014/2015 BA were going through some spasms of trying to reinvent CW - they filed a bunch of patents but didn't go anywhere with actually building out the seats, then set themselves a plan of doing something in 2016/2017, when appears to have settled on the non-innovative 'CW with all aisle access' and finally Cruz just said "enough of this - let's buy seat <x>"