Ldnn1

But the point is that there is no BA flight from LGW to HKG anyway, so the 3-4-3 issue isn't relevant to your decision...

frenzie01

But the point is that I live in central London and could not care less which airport I am flying from, takes the same time to get to both. (I usually fly from LHR)

My decision was purely based on the density of Y on BA and CX.

FlyerTalker39574

Interesting that they are starting with the high aircraft utilisation routes and not the longer sectors.

simons1

Both BA and CX are 3-3-3.

1010101

From next year CX will begin refitting it's 777s with 3-4-3 seating, and you can bet your house it wont be long before BA's LHR fleet sees it too.

Thankfully the A350 is not wide enough to see that configuration.

FlyerTalker39574

Air Caraibes has 3-4-3 on their A350s. https://thepointsguy.com/2017/03/inside-air-caraibes-a350/

bmibaby737

It does but would mean a seat less wider than a dreamliner economy seat. The XWB sales point of the A350 was to allow 18 inch wide seats compared to the dreamliner's 9 a breast 17 inch.

contrails7

Just as a counterpoint I recently flew whY (return) with Qatar Airways to Windhoek. Owing to a re-route via JNB on the outbound, we got a chance to sample all 4 of their main LH workhorses: 77W, A380, B787 and A330. The former was configured 3-4-3 and was perfectly fine. The B787 and A330 were perfectly dreadful. The A380 was in another league to all the others.

Looking at Seat Guru doesn't tell the whole story. Seat width on the A380 is 18.5 inches, 17.5 on the A330, 17.2 on the Dreamliner and 17 on the B777W. Seat pitch ranges from 32 inches (A380, B777W and A330) to 31 inches (B787).

For me it's definitely pitch (and seat design) and not lateral density which is the deciding factor on comfort. The B777W seat just felt so much more comfortable than either the A330 or B787, which both trump it on width. The B787 was by far the worst offender in this regard given the miserly pitch, intruding entertainment boxes and generally very cramped feel. I now understand why so many on here complain about the B787 in the back - I've not flown it on BA but it looks like an identical configuration to QR.

I guess all this is a long winded way of saying that the issue is not the lateral density but the pitch (and partially the seat design). Having now tried both I would take QR's 3-4-3 B777W config any day of the week over BA's current 3-3-3 config given the former's superior pitch. Now if BA were to move towards QR config that would be somethign to applaud. But 3-4-3 and 31 inches... hmm. Let's just hope it's one of heck of an innovative seat design...

frenzie01

Again I had the choice between BA 772 which I believe is 3-4-3 and CX A350 which is 3-3-3.

Steve_ZA

Your belief is not correct . The densified BA772s will not (for now) operate any route which is also operated by a CX A350. These are the routes where you would have a concern and only on the days listed:

Calum

This is painful to read...

DYKWIA

No, only LGW flights will have 3-4-3. BA don't fly to HKG from LGW, only from LHR.

So, LHR 772 will be 3-3-3, same as CX A350.

A P Yu

Only LGW will have 3:4:3 initially. All LHR 772ERs (YMM*) will also go 3:4:3 eventually
If HKG ever goes onto the 772 from LHR, it will also be 3:4:3 (unlikely though as I suspect F demand on the HKG will keep it safe)

DYKWIA

As I said...

Ldnn1

Eventually the 77Ws will go 3-4-3 too. It might not be plannned yet, but it is inevitable.

I flew an AC 77W on Friday and it's amazing how many seats they get on it. I'm only surprised BA has taken so long to do it.