rockflyertalk

According to Alex Cruz CEO, the A380 will get the new CS.

pythonisman

It will/should also be touch screen. Alternately you'll be able to take the small handheld IFE controller out of the hatch and sit it on top as well if you like.

Mutu

Have had a read through it, quite interesting.
and perhaps now we join some dots and see 10 abreast 777 is all about ultimately having a smaller Y cabin footprint but similar seat-count to 9 abreast, 8 F is all about having a smaller F cabin footprint and a smaller yield driving seat-count, so that NCWS can get sensible density with all aisle access. I THINK I heard the 77W would be 8F, 76J (up from 56J). NO idea on W cabin but probably Y with 10 abreast seat count as per 9 abreast as now

T8191

Thanks ... I always prefer the handheld, as it avoids having to stretch out to punch the screen. I know, I’m lazy, but in a ‘relaxed’ posture screen-tapping is a bit of a pain.

Swanhunter

Kevlondon

It's a great development, finally the end of the ying-yang concept is in sight. More importantly, it will put the seats on a par with AA's fabulous 777-300 product. The doors will be a nice touch that will provide a small bridge to first class in many people's minds - one of the current seat's biggest downfalls is the total lack of privacy if you get stuck with an aisle seat. Plus, 2-4-2 is a disgraceful configuration for LH business class. Well done BA - at least 5 years later than you should have done this, but good job nonetheless.

etiene

You'll be disappointed to realise that at most points in this configuration a line drawn across the cabin will pass through eight seats then.

Kevlondon

This from the interview with Alex Cruz in Business Traveller: "We didn’t believe that it was right for BA to continue offering an eight-abreast product."

andimilk

It doesn't look that way in the virtual mock-ups, unless you are referring to the specific point where one person's feet intersect with the same line as the person in front's torso?

JAXBA

There were never actually 8 seated torsos in a row, but 4 then 4.

Technicality, yes.

BA could have numbered the forward facing seats as even and rear facing seats as odd, but that would have been confusing...

Globaliser

The supposed dichotomy between current CW's "8-abreast" and the "4-abreast" of the new layout and all of the similar layouts is false, and it always has been. There's always some overlap between one person's feet and some other person's head and body. Current CW does it differently from most others because of the yin-yang arrangement, thus its higher density. But the difference is one of degree, not of distinction; only a completely unthinking person would say that moving from current CW's "2-4-2" to the new "1-2-1" means double the space or half the density (although I acknowledge that there have sometimes been such people posting on FT). Take any similar cabin and draw any horizontal line across the aircraft: it will almost always cross some part of each of 8 seats.

Globaliser

What I will miss least when current CW has gone: people saying "ying-yang". Aaaagh!

Cap'n Benj

etiene

These. Had BA gone with 1-2-1 numbering I suspect we'd have had rather fewer silly posts about the density of CW - or maybe people would have understood the geometric shenanigans that make lie-flat, all aisle access business class viable.

RB211

I agree... where does that extra 'g' come from? I guess it's better that labeling it with Nicky Hayden's [RIP] number, which would probably have been more unfortunate!

rb211.