GaxxyFlyer

I'd say if you got 3 rows of seats in the seat selection screen, it's the old one. the new one has 6 rows I believe.

pb3

That's a pretty busy schedule - what happens if the poor old aircraft goes "tech"? - if fully loaded then any replacement 777 would be unable to accomodate the 336 passengers!

Flexible preferences

It would be very interesting to see what most passengers would choose if they could pick their version of this aircraft at the gate - un-refurbished 9 across with crappy old IFE, or refurbished 10 across with brand new seats and excellent IFE. My hunch is the majority would go with the latter.

TWEED1A

Are they actually being sold for 336 passengers? Might explain the odd config people have mentioned in previous posts. That would allow for other aircraft to cover without disrupting a significant number of passengers.

jday

How does the width in the new WT compare with that on the 787s? Worse or the same?

Ldnn1

Looking at the photos kindly posted by @firstlight, my hunch is you are right.

dougzz

And if asked again after the flight?

ahmetdouas

Have you flown on a 3-4-3 777? Really not bad, although the one i flew on, NZ 777 had 33 inch pitch, not 31, so maybe that made things more bearable!

percysmith

It depends on your body dimensions.

I'm a squat guy with relative broad shoulders so 3-4-3 is hell for me.
I've been on two - JAL domestic 777 3-4-3 and Scoot (SQ LCC) 772 3-4-3 (before they were phased out)

In the former (just one-way), I was in DE when I saw a Japanese couple in FG with the husband in the middle (F), so I sat in the middle too.
We spent the flight pulling our shoulders away from each other so it was hardly pleasant.

In the latter (outbound), I was in B with wife in A and an overbearing middle-aged women (師奶) in the aisle.
My right shoulder spent the whole trip being squashed again.

In the inbound, we were reunited with another couple flying back. This time the wives sat in the middle and both the husbands were able to occupy the aisle, which was more tolerable.

I was told my teammates at that time (two skinny, short Asian girls) that sitting in 3-4-3 for 13 hours from HKG to DFW on AA posed no problem.

So I am convinced it's how you're built.
I am way under 6 feet but have shoulder width of 17.5 inches.

13901

There's a 'cap', I believe, on the number of passengers for a while, as the number of refurbished planes increases, so to avoid too much mess in case of a tech aircraft change. However, it has to be said that Gatters uses their planes pretty heavily, so that schedule is nothing out of the ordinary for them.

This is only my understanding and might, or might not, be company policy.

dougzz

No, and I won't either. I flew on a 787 a couple of years ago in PE, and used it as an opportunity to quickly try a WT seat. I could barely fit, and it was awful for the 20 seconds I sat in it. I'm fat, and as I've got older I've become unwilling to fly LH economy. SH economy fine. LH economy don't go. If I can't get a price I like, or some other circumstance leads to an economy only option I'd sooner not travel. To clarify I sat in the old 3-3-3 and 2-5-2 seats without problem, and without spilling into a neighbour. This isn't just seat space, they've moved them closer to the walls, so there's no gain in a window seat to lean away from a neighbour, in fact the window seats are worse as the curve of the fuselage steals your foot and shoulder space.

It's all been argued before, but I think this will lead to more incidents of air rage, whether they escalate to the point an airline cares who knows. But it's not just the seat width, the shoulder space, the proximty of others, the aisle is no refuge as the carts and passers by will bump you. It's just not right.

I do wonder is there really no place for an airline that differentiates the seat quality over price, but at affordable levels. I've read here maany times that BA's most profitable cabin (assume per m2) is WT+. Why not actually expand that into something that says BA are better. I read lots of (Internet) analysis that when you add seats economics says they get sold at the lowest price, so why keep adding seats where you become a volume seller of crap, instead of a different product people really want. I don't know what's right, but I do know that management target things that make them rich in the short term, with no long term regard for the health of the company.

In regard to the last point I see VS have introduced a sweet economy or some such term, with an increased pitch. I hope it's the start of a trend to improve the back of the plane.

A P Yu

These are just the extra legroom seats which already exist on the plane. Theres no new onboard product. Just a new way of selling them.

FlyerTalker39574

FlyerTalker688786

Now it is confirmed that the 10 across B777 will be based in Heathrow as well from middle of 2019. As per Business Traveller report. BT thinks 15 of the B777 will be in Heathrow. I can not verify the accuracy but I think it did not sound right from the capital day announcement.

RobDBA

I will certainly be trying these seats out before I judge them, the screen size and USB are huge improvements - dodgy small IFE with a small selection can be a real problem on a long Y flight. I am 6'2" and 'big boned' but if well designed a 10% reduction (and I believe some of the space is coming from narrow aisles?) doesn't have to mean discomfort. We'll see.