Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Cathay Pacific | Marco Polo Club
Reload this Page >

Densified 777 10 abreast: Reviews and Experiences

Densified 777 10 abreast: Reviews and Experiences

    Hide Wikipost
Old Sep 9, 18, 11:30 pm   -   Wikipost
Please read: This is a community-maintained wiki post containing the most important information from this thread. You may edit the Wiki once you have been on FT for 90 days and have made 90 posts.
 
Last edit by: bart simpson
Wiki Link
Confirmed:
SCMP, Oct 2, 2016: Hong Kong’s Cathay Pacific to introduce 10-abreast seating in its Boeing planes
SCMP, March 31, 2017: Hong Kong Cathay Pacific passengers to feel the squeeze in push for profits
SCMP, March 31, 2017: Inside Cathay Pacific's new condensed economy class

48 long-haul 777s to be retrofitted. 17 regionals (including the 5 ex-Emirates aircraft). Five of the earliest 77W long-haul fleet (all first-class) to be phased out.

New seat details
Seat legroom: 32" (no change)
Seat width: 17.2" (down 1.3")
IFE screen: Long-haul - 12" (up 3"); Regional - 9" (no change)
Extra personal storage
New six-way headrest (similar to A350 but not like-for-like)
Wi-Fi
Thinner seats but extra padding

Economy class retrofit from mid-2018 to 2020
10% more economy seats
19 extra Y seats to 201 in 4-class 777: for 294 passengers.
28 extra Y seats to 296 in 3-class 777: for 368 passengers.
40 extra Y seats to 396 in regional 777: for 438 passengers.

Previous discussion on Cathay's decision to densify: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/cath...er-row-44.html
Print Wikipost

Old Aug 22, 18, 7:53 am
  #91  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Asia Miles. Not bothering to join Marco Polo.
Posts: 16,763
Originally Posted by clubeurope View Post
Makes all the difference
Oh. Maybe Patricia's HK Coliseum scalping tactics are working too well https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/cath...l#post29872510...
clubeurope likes this.
percysmith is online now  
Old Aug 22, 18, 8:45 am
  #92  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Programs: Marco Polo Club
Posts: 11
I AGREE wholeheartedly. It was the same with the regional J and far back when they introduced the shell back economy too - a very superior product but convention reacted in such a negative way. Why couldn't it be appreciated for the tremendous product that it was? NO WORRY of the seatback coming towards you!! That is incredible!!! I still believe it to be the best economy seat out there.
TambaTrio is offline  
Old Aug 22, 18, 8:47 am
  #93  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Programs: Marco Polo Club
Posts: 11
Yes it was a very full flight, as it always seems to be Tokyo - HK. It really was a good product and superior to A359 even (which is also very good) - it just gave me hope amidst so much (what I feel is) negative bashing that CX gets.
TambaTrio is offline  
Old Aug 22, 18, 9:15 am
  #94  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Asia Miles. Not bothering to join Marco Polo.
Posts: 16,763
Originally Posted by TambaTrio View Post
Yes it was a very full flight, as it always seems to be Tokyo - HK. It really was a good product and superior to A359 even (which is also very good) - it just gave me hope amidst so much (what I feel is) negative bashing that CX gets.
Your shoulder width? Less than 19 inches?
percysmith is online now  
Old Aug 23, 18, 3:24 am
  #95  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Programs: AAdvantage Asia Miles Air China
Posts: 703
Originally Posted by TambaTrio View Post
Yes it was a very full flight, as it always seems to be Tokyo - HK. It really was a good product and superior to A359 even (which is also very good) - it just gave me hope amidst so much (what I feel is) negative bashing that CX gets.
You just reminded me of the joke about the sadist and the masochist. Masochist "Whip me, whip me" with the Sadist ripping his hair out going "No, No".

Guess which one I think is the passenger on a 10 abreast 777? You have just brought new meaning to the Latin phrase 'Dun spiro spero'! (While I breathe I hope)

All in good fun

Last edited by Nicc HK; Aug 23, 18 at 3:48 am
Nicc HK is offline  
Old Aug 23, 18, 3:47 am
  #96  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Asia Miles. Not bothering to join Marco Polo.
Posts: 16,763
Originally Posted by Nicc HK View Post
You just reminded me of the joke about the sadist and the masochist. Masochist "Whip me, whip me" with the Sadist ripping his hair out going "No, No".
How well each passenger assesses the 3-4-3 seat dpeends on shoulder width. If you're my niece - so narrow around the shoulders that I can probably make her and a twin share a Y seat if push came to shove - then the new build might be attractive.
clubeurope likes this.
percysmith is online now  
Old Aug 23, 18, 4:48 am
  #97  
Marriott Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: EDI, TYO, CGK
Programs: CX MPC Diamond, BAEC Gold, SK EBS Silver, JX COSMILE Insighter
Posts: 1,876
I mean effectively all the new features like the bigger TV and the storage this and that can be said to be a massive improvement to the average passenger, but not to those with broad shoulders.

clubeurope is online now  
Old Aug 23, 18, 5:16 am
  #98  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Asia Miles. Not bothering to join Marco Polo.
Posts: 16,763
Originally Posted by clubeurope View Post
can be said to be a massive improvement to the average passenger, but not to those with broad shoulders.

Average is an interesting word
"Average" male shoulder width https://www.firstinarchitecture.co.u...le-dimensions/ = 465mm = 18,3 inches
(Female 395mm = 15.6 inches)

CX 3-4-3 seat = 17.2 + 1.5 (two halves of armest) = 18.7
So the new seat leaves no wiggle room for two adjacent males (or an oversized (overbearing) C9, as in my first 3-4-3 experience).

---

Obviously airlines are not required to consider averages.
percysmith is online now  
Old Aug 23, 18, 5:23 am
  #99  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Asia Miles. Not bothering to join Marco Polo.
Posts: 16,763
Originally Posted by clubeurope View Post
I mean effectively all the new features like the bigger TV and the storage this and that can be said to be a massive improvement
It's relative
While I despair every time I board a shoddy HK taxi I flag (my commute transformed from a comfortable "85%" order taxi to a intra-island commute from a cab rank)
How new a seat is is temporary. Maintenance also comes into it (OK, CX hasn't done well there either or maybe there's not much you can really do while the seats are in such constant use)
How big a seat is is permanent
percysmith is online now  
Old Aug 23, 18, 5:40 am
  #100  
Marriott Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: EDI, TYO, CGK
Programs: CX MPC Diamond, BAEC Gold, SK EBS Silver, JX COSMILE Insighter
Posts: 1,876
Originally Posted by percysmith View Post
Average is an interesting word
I agree, pardon my wording. Though in that regard, a supposedly average build would vary from places to places. So there will be people who find the new seats more desirable due to all the new features, but definitely not everyone, and perhaps not the majority.

I personally dislike (the new) narrower seats for I have rather broad shoulders, but I know many who would disagree and like the new features and find it as an improvement.
clubeurope is online now  
Old Aug 23, 18, 7:35 pm
  #101  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Programs: Marco Polo Club
Posts: 11
I measured myself earlier and I am 18inches across. I'm 175cm tall and about 90kg, so very much on the chubby side, but still found it very comfortable. Just to give you an idea!
TambaTrio is offline  
Old Aug 23, 18, 7:36 pm
  #102  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Programs: Marco Polo Club
Posts: 11

I understand. I do want to tell the world that CX going 3-4-3 really isn't the end of the world like so many people seem to think, that's all!
TambaTrio is offline  
Old Aug 23, 18, 8:56 pm
  #103  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Asia Miles. Not bothering to join Marco Polo.
Posts: 16,763
Originally Posted by TambaTrio View Post
I measured myself earlier and I am 18inches across. I'm 175cm tall and about 90kg, so very much on the chubby side, but still found it very comfortable. Just to give you an idea!
I'm not very fit either. But I don't think my BMI matters as my oversized stomach is merely a lap problem, not overflowing over into the armrests. We have similar BMIs.

It's my shoulder width. I was put through a lot of swimming as it was the only sport I did consistently with interest as a child. So I ended up with very broad shoulders for my height.

---

Further discrimination on personal charecteristics (fat, tall, wide) also factors in my view of your praise of the hard shell Economy seat.

Another characteristic I am starting to have a bad back - I prefer reclining seats over sliding seat designs (this also applies to my dislike to regional business seats which I fly on redeye routes on public holidays).

I believe this is up to debate but I believe I am not alone - I believe it is fair to say half the people (including you) really like the hard shell seat and half (inclduing me) hate it equally as much.

But when market conditions dictate we have to share the same product, is is fairest on passengers to chose a product that elicits the least controversy. Hard shell certainly elicits more controversy than reclining, and is less desirable from a mass market passenger POV.

---

The latter only affects CX P&L if passengers buy in their differented product (they didn't, as evidenced by they didn't continue it).

The former directly improves CX P&L if the 11% seat count gain is not offset by >11% fare decrease to fill seats (I think this will generally be true, unfortunately. Especially since we've few alternatives on peak days, and it does not make such a big impact on other days)

Last edited by percysmith; Aug 23, 18 at 9:08 pm
percysmith is online now  
Old Aug 23, 18, 9:53 pm
  #104  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: SFO/HKG
Programs: ex-UA 1K, AA EXP, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 477
In full disclosure, I have not tried any 777 with a 3-4-3 in the back (nor would I want to). The hard facts and maths leave me feeling skeptical about how 17 inches could even be remotely comfortable. As a mental exercise, I've thought about the reasons why I could be wrong:

1) A window seat could be tolerable given the extra shoulder width due to the curvature of the plane and the impossibility of someone's behind rubbing up against your shoulder as they walk up the aisle
2) Perhaps there is some extra engineering performed on the seat such that one would sink into the seat effectively reducing the effective shoulder width (similar to how crossing arms reduces shoulder width).
3) Perhaps CX added a slight amount of pitch between rows (even an 1/4th inch would be noticable difference)

Obviously, if the seat next to you is empty or sits a loved one or a child, then it obviously won't be nearly as bad as having a bulky stranger sitting next to you.
triplefives is offline  
Old Aug 23, 18, 11:18 pm
  #105  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Asia Miles. Not bothering to join Marco Polo.
Posts: 16,763
3) definitely didn't happen

Loved one doesn't always work
- on a JAL 777 3-4-3 HND-CTS domestic flight my wife and I proceeded to seats D and E and found a Japanese couple with the man in F and the wife in G. I naturally took E and my wife in D. The other bloke and I suffered as a result, but I don't have the requisite Japanese skills (nor undestood it is culturally acceptable) to ask both wives to move.
- on another Scoot flight (when they still had 772s) my mate and I really stuffed our wives in the middle to make the flight more sufferable.
percysmith is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: