Why is BA dragging their heels on the J product?
#76
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: ORD
Programs: US Air, UA BA LH AI DELTA MARRIOTT CHOICE SGP
Posts: 9,883
News to me, sort of, is there any documentation if they advertise it as such ?
#77
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
This is an unjustified notion of equivalence. If you did a poll on FT, I guarantee you that 1-2-1 would win by a significant if not devastating margin. And I guarantee that in a poll of the public, flying backward would lose by a very considerable margin, too.
BA apologists are free to live in a fantasy world where CW is an industry-leading product but that doesn't make it so. It takes all sorts though, so no hard feelings.
BA apologists are free to live in a fantasy world where CW is an industry-leading product but that doesn't make it so. It takes all sorts though, so no hard feelings.
Having said that, despite a lot of bluster there is nothing to objectively support what you say. In fact I can see quite a few people on this thread that completely disagree with your opinion. If you think 1-2-1 seating comes with no trade offs then you are kidding yourself. The trade off here is the use of foot coffins and similar which enables other airlines to fit more or less the same number of seats in the same space. Personally I prefer that model but a number of posters on here clearly don't.
As for saying what a poll may show, you may be right, but until the poll is done that is also your subjective opinion as you have no objective or empirical evidence to back it up.
#78
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LON, ACK, BOS..... (Not necessarily in that order)
Programs: **Mucci Diamond Hairbrush** - compared to that nothing else matters (+BA Bronze)
Posts: 15,112
#79
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: London
Posts: 1,503
This pejorative term 'foot coffin' is being thrown about a fair bit. Having flown AA J, this, with all due politeness, is being spun into more of an issue than it actually is; it's not objectively a design problem. If I wanted to place one foot vertically on top of the other, heel-on-toe, then sure it's an issue. Ditto if I want to lift my feet up towards the cabin ceiling when lying down. I guess if one of my starting points on requirements when sleeping is to have the same amount of space above my feet as that of my head, then I really have reached the thin edge of the wedge.
Do people really think BA haven't invested in a new CW product over the past few years because they still believe the current iteration of CW is market-leading?
Do people really think BA haven't invested in a new CW product over the past few years because they still believe the current iteration of CW is market-leading?
#80
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LON, ACK, BOS..... (Not necessarily in that order)
Programs: **Mucci Diamond Hairbrush** - compared to that nothing else matters (+BA Bronze)
Posts: 15,112
This pejorative term 'foot coffin' is being thrown about a fair bit. Having flown AA J, this, with all due politeness, is being spun into more of an issue than it actually is; it's not objectively a design problem. If I wanted to place one foot vertically on top of the other, heel-on-toe, then sure it's an issue. Ditto if I want to lift my feet up towards the cabin ceiling when lying down. I guess if one of my starting points on requirements when sleeping is to have the same amount of space above my feet as that of my head, then I really have reached the thin edge of the wedge.
Do people really think BA haven't invested in a new CW product over the past few years because they still believe the current iteration of CW is market-leading?
Do people really think BA haven't invested in a new CW product over the past few years because they still believe the current iteration of CW is market-leading?
Last edited by Jimmie76; Jul 10, 2017 at 8:12 am Reason: hypen in deal-breaker
#81
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: JER
Programs: BA Gold/OWE, several MUCCI, and assorted Pensions!
Posts: 32,139
The 'foot coffin' debate is as perpetual as the 'privacy' comments
Aren't we all different?
As I kindly allow iWife to always have the window seat, for her privacy, I'm perfectly accustomed to being 'exposed' in the aisle ... which makes service easy, convenient and audible! Likewise, and contrarily, I have no difficulty with the AA 'foot coffin' despite being a 6-footer with size 10 feet ... perhaps it's the position I sleep in?
We ARE all different! Get used to it!
Aren't we all different?
As I kindly allow iWife to always have the window seat, for her privacy, I'm perfectly accustomed to being 'exposed' in the aisle ... which makes service easy, convenient and audible! Likewise, and contrarily, I have no difficulty with the AA 'foot coffin' despite being a 6-footer with size 10 feet ... perhaps it's the position I sleep in?
We ARE all different! Get used to it!
#82
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: ORD
Programs: US Air, UA BA LH AI DELTA MARRIOTT CHOICE SGP
Posts: 9,883
BA don't advertise it as safer but it's certainly well known that rear facing seats are safer. Here is a news report stating just that: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/ne...t-seats-safer/
This pejorative term 'foot coffin' is being thrown about a fair bit. Having flown AA J, this, with all due politeness, is being spun into more of an issue than it actually is; it's not objectively a design problem. If I wanted to place one foot vertically on top of the other, heel-on-toe, then sure it's an issue. Ditto if I want to lift my feet up towards the cabin ceiling when lying down. I guess if one of my starting points on requirements when sleeping is to have the same amount of space above my feet as that of my head, then I really have reached the thin edge of the wedge.
Do people really think BA haven't invested in a new CW product over the past few years because they still believe the current iteration of CW is market-leading?
Do people really think BA haven't invested in a new CW product over the past few years because they still believe the current iteration of CW is market-leading?