![]() |
Originally Posted by ermen
(Post 27740988)
I have made a mental note not to sit in Row 11 of the A350.... seems too close to the toilets it seems for my own liking. not sure why they needed to design it as such
|
Originally Posted by FlyPointyEnd
(Post 27741146)
in order to fit two more seats, I think it would have been much better if they used the space to make the galley bigger.
The way the curtain is placed diagonally between the toilet and 11D, passengers tend to lean toward seat 11D when opening the curtain.:td: On another note, it seems like the 11D/G and 20D/G seats are the only seats that can (in fact, must) have the outer armrest raised during takeoff/landing. |
Originally Posted by chfshifter
(Post 27745127)
Curious how'd a bigger galley directly benefit the passengers?
The way the curtain is placed diagonally between the toilet and 11D, passengers tend to lean toward seat 11D when opening the curtain.:td: On another note, it seems like the 11D/G and 20D/G seats are the only seats that can (in fact, must) have the outer armrest raised during takeoff/landing. |
1 Attachment(s)
Just saw this on Airbus' Facebook Page. Quite curious about the >98.7% Operational Reliability part. :D:D:D
|
Originally Posted by FlyPointyEnd
(Post 27778299)
Just saw this on Airbus' Facebook Page. Quite curious about the >98.7% Operational Reliability part. :D:D:D
|
Originally Posted by FlyPointyEnd
(Post 27778299)
Just saw this on Airbus' Facebook Page. Quite curious about the >98.7% Operational Reliability part. :D:D:D
|
I guess as long as the aircraft is not AOG for 24 hours they would count it as "flyable"
|
Originally Posted by sscywong
(Post 27781564)
I guess as long as the aircraft is not AOG for 24 hours they would count it as "flyable"
|
Originally Posted by ermen
(Post 27740988)
I have made a mental note not to sit in Row 11 of the A350.... seems too close to the toilets it seems for my own liking. not sure why they needed to design it as such
For some reason there's no row 13, it jumps straight to 14. |
Originally Posted by 360cisitalia
(Post 27697511)
well, i would say quality issue on fittings are quite dissapointing, i was on lrb 24 dec and lri 2 jan
20dg seats have brocken extention flaps and laminate peels off badly consider aug delivred for lrb for lrj even worse as 16d has broken extentiin flaps and 16g arm rest rattels when kn up position and stuck in the base when near down position. cathay try to use silicon to cover or solve the issue of peeling off laminate but obvious just make the fitting looks even cheaper anyway, great aircraft and interio design ruined by the fitting quality - SIN-HKG 14A had broken extension flap and the covering of the connector between the seat and arm rest came off - HKG-SIN 12G also had the covering of the connector periodically coming off, and the arm rest would not raise! Mentioned this to the ISD and she apologetically admitted that "this is a common problem, and only on the A350". Such modern plane, modern cabin, modern entertainment... to be let down by unfunctioning fixtures. |
Originally Posted by carrotjuice
(Post 27791369)
Such modern plane, modern cabin, modern entertainment... to be let down by unfunctioning fixtures.
For some optimism, there is a history of CX rectifying issues like these. With coffin J, the early installs had fabric issues. CX eventually got this right. Later installs came with the improved fabric, and the early installs were eventually replaced. It did take 3-4 years though for all the fabric to be standardized in the newer, more-durable style across the fleet. There were also smaller issues which were only partially-improved which might not be cause for optimism, like that "lip" which is at the back of the counter-top table in Cirrus J window seats. Count me as someone who has lost stuff into my neighbor's seat behind me. This lip wasn't installed in the earliest Cirrus-equipped 77Ws (called "77D"), and it still isn't. It took until somewhere around registration # B-KPY and KPZ (roughly CX's 25th/26th 77W), when the 77Gs started arriving, before that lip was added. Some of the A333s have it, some don't. To be fair, the fabric issue was a real flaw and the seats were becoming destroyed quickly. CX did rectify this. Whereas this "lip" is more of an added convenience but not make-or-break. And remember when CX first put out J class beds in 2007, we had that crappy blanket thing? Within a few years, CX rolled out their current duvet, which I still think is among the best if not the best J class duvet in the sky. So I think we have cause to be optimism if the A359 J seat issue is really serious. |
Originally Posted by QRC3288
(Post 27794325)
Yea, it all seems to be J class problems, which means it's probably all related to the Zodiac issue. I wonder how many of these birds will be plagued by this issue until its resolved. Pretty sure these issues are the crux of CX's well-documented problems with Zodiac.
For some optimism, there is a history of CX rectifying issues like these. With coffin J, the early installs had fabric issues. CX eventually got this right. Later installs came with the improved fabric, and the early installs were eventually replaced. It did take 3-4 years though for all the fabric to be standardized in the newer, more-durable style across the fleet. There were also smaller issues which were only partially-improved which might not be cause for optimism, like that "lip" which is at the back of the counter-top table in Cirrus J window seats. Count me as someone who has lost stuff into my neighbor's seat behind me. This lip wasn't installed in the earliest Cirrus-equipped 77Ws (called "77D"), and it still isn't. It took until somewhere around registration # B-KPY and KPZ (roughly CX's 25th/26th 77W), when the 77Gs started arriving, before that lip was added. Some of the A333s have it, some don't. To be fair, the fabric issue was a real flaw and the seats were becoming destroyed quickly. CX did rectify this. Whereas this "lip" is more of an added convenience but not make-or-break. And remember when CX first put out J class beds in 2007, we had that crappy blanket thing? Within a few years, CX rolled out their current duvet, which I still think is among the best if not the best J class duvet in the sky. So I think we have cause to be optimism if the A359 J seat issue is really serious. After 1 sector of 359 in R back into Sept, and 2 sector in J in Christmas, I can't say R is better than J as it is only 1 month old plane when I traveled on R and the B-LRB is a few months older when I took it in J. But at least as you said the problems are in J cabin definitely. I will have 2 sector of 359 R coming in March, 1 J in June and another 2 J in Sept, hope I can see some improvement at least step by step. All my 359 travels are between HKG and DUS. And for sure I would like to check R cabin again to compare the quality between J and R as they come from different suppliers, but also hope for an op-up:D, see which I can have in March. btw if EF says W7R3E1, is that means 7 seats left or 12 as seatmap show 12 vacant seats. |
anyone booked to MEL on the A359 next week? does CX do anything?
just curious. Realized MEL is getting 35G in a few days. Does CX do anything for the first flight or anything like that?
|
Originally Posted by QRC3288
(Post 27794325)
And remember when CX first put out J class beds in 2007, we had that crappy blanket thing? Within a few years, CX rolled out their current duvet, which I still think is among the best if not the best J class duvet in the sky. So I think we have cause to be optimism if the A359 J seat issue is really serious. |
Originally Posted by 360cisitalia
(Post 27795064)
btw if EF says W7R3E1, is that means 7 seats left or 12 as seatmap show 12 vacant seats.
But no one knows as CX can oversell (so less than 7) or undersell i.e. more than 7 (maybe some serious overselling in Y so reserved some seat for op-up) |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:50 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.