Of course, this hasn't stopped Airbus from loading demo pictures of first class suites, lounges, salons, etc. in pictures of the A380:D

Because J+ wasn't a planned upgrade and they had to use the existing seats -- had not developed a flat seat and didn't want to buy any of the non-SQ products. Not all SQ ventures are well planned or executed.

I know it is not easy, but can't they tweat the existing seat to make it flat? Seems like a bit waste of the extra pitch? However from the pictures it does not seem like it is 70 inch pitch

It's not lying. Aircraft and engines are at the cutting edge of technology and they don't usually exactly match what the engineers say they will do.

That would be a manufacturer and not a customer issue. Airbus promised specific numbers that they later failed to meet.

Rather than refer to "compensation whores" why not refer to Airbus' "sleezebucket salespeople" as the problem?

Steve

The airlines are sophisticated customers -- they know what they're doing when it comes to aircraft and engines purchases.

It's just a term we use in the business. There's really no value judgment in it. It's just the way it is. We're just as tough on our suppliers. It all flows down hill.

Well, according to seatguru, the A345 offers 64" of pitch in J vs. 58" in the 747s, or an extra 6". Definitely not enough for lie-flat. Flatter perhaps?

If "compensation whore" is a friendly, non-judgemental term, maybe more of us should attend Flyertalk Evangelist Language School (taught by a fellow named Imus?) so we can all be on the same wavelength. Without that training, it sounds not only judgemental but inflammatory to me.

Meanwhile, your "airlines are sophisticated customers", applied to the discussion of aircraft promise versus reality as you presumably intended it, is an inane generalization. Some of the larger carriers have decent engineering departments, but even they must base their evaluations on the data the manufacturers give them. After that review, engineering says "these are really aggressive performance numbers - what makes you think you can meet them"? And the manufacturer goes on about their great design team and tools, and their marketing people go on about how they've guaranteed the performance in writing.

Seriously, it's just a phrase. I would have thought most people were familair with it. Guess not.

How many new aircraft/new engine campaigns have you been a part of?

Airframer and enigne manufacturers offer performance guarantees as well as, at least in the case of engine manufacturers, substantial up front discounts to win business. Airlines know this and rightly take advantage of those discounts and guarantees.

You have to understand that these are very sophisiticated transactions involving two (or often three) sophisticated parties with teams of lawyers, engineers and finance people on each side. Buying an airplane is not like going down to the car dealership. A contract can take months if not years to negotiate. You also are just negotiating a one-time transaction, but, essentially creating a relationship for years to come.

In other words, both parties know what they're getting into in these transactions. Neither side is good and neither is bad. It is just business. We use the "compensation whore" label not as a derogatory comment, but as a light hearted turn of phrase to describe how the business works.

Thanks for the correction. I know 70inch sounds too much anyway!

All government/military. If we don't meet the specs, they simply shoot us.

Actually it is 70 inch. Seatguru is often wrong, esp. for cabins with irregular layout (which happens to be the SQ A345 config). Pitch varies in the J+ cabin. In any case the SQ J seat needs about 75 inch pitch to be able to go fully level and flat (presuming it can be programmed to go level).

I don't know where you got 70". The SpaceBed pitch on the A345s is indeed 64".

SQ used the old bed, they just increased the pitch as the floor on the A345 wasn't strong enough to support the J seats at the originally planned spacing, also there was a center of gravity issue which prevented using the F seats. The floor problem results in an irregular spacing (it varies through the cabin). As it was a low-volume config, this was a better solution than coming up with a proper interior layout.

This thread really has little to do with CX. If it interests you, take it up in the SQ forum. I'm sure there are lots of people that have noticed the irregular spacing and figured it out.

Well that makes it easier!

About half our business is miltary and/or space related. I don't have anything to do with those business units.