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 Kongís 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

Reply

Old Aug 24, 18, 5:29 am
  #106  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Programs: Marco Polo Club
Posts: 11
I see! That's put things into perspective for me, thanks! Ah, the benefits of discussion and debate. I'm glad I signed up to Flyertalk!
TambaTrio is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 18, 6:25 pm
  #107  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,421
Originally Posted by TambaTrio View Post

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!

a requirement of commenting on this forum is that posters are NOT permitted to praise CX or say anything positive about CX.....
Kachjc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 18, 11:01 pm
  #108  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Depends
Posts: 14,359
Crew's comments on 10 abreast [CX Secrets]

#9149 "On 77K flight [to US] ground crew told us we can't offload any hand carry into the hold even if the overheads are full, because the cargo hold is full too"

#9145 "Please mind your elbow when you seat in aisle seat. Don't hit on my lap please."

percysmith is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 18, 12:44 am
  #109  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,421
Originally Posted by percysmith View Post
#9149 "On 77K flight [to US] ground crew told us we can't offload any hand carry into the hold even if the overheads are full, because the cargo hold is full too"



#9145 "Please mind your elbow when you seat in aisle seat. Don't hit on my lap please."
yes cause all the other airlines with 10 abreast that many here even chose to fly over CX when CX was nine abreast do not have these issues...
Kachjc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 18, 2:10 am
  #110  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Depends
Posts: 14,359
Originally Posted by Kachjc View Post
yes cause all the other airlines with 10 abreast that many here even chose to fly over CX when CX was nine abreast do not have these issues...
These are crew complaints not passengers. You mean crews also select which airlines they fly?
percysmith is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 18, 7:57 am
  #111  
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 13
Has anyone noticed that the DEFG seat has significant less seat pitch that the window side 3-seaters?

Its very noticeable indeed.
Blackbird_hkg is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 18, 9:25 am
  #112  
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Programs: MPC-Gold, Enrich-Plat
Posts: 626
Originally Posted by Blackbird_hkg View Post
Has anyone noticed that the DEFG seat has significant less seat pitch that the window side 3-seaters?

Its very noticeable indeed.
Do you have documentation about that ? I would be very surprised, if it is like you describe. It would ruin standardization across components.
Cambo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 18, 12:03 pm
  #113  
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by Cambo View Post
Do you have documentation about that ? I would be very surprised, if it is like you describe. It would ruin standardization across components.
Donít have any documentation but I was taking B-HNE having the seat 42D tonight.

The difference in seat pitch itch is just too obvious that can be easily observed by eyes. I havenít advised to the ISM but she agreed but has no clue of course.
Blackbird_hkg is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 18, 1:17 pm
  #114  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Depends
Posts: 14,359
Given # of seat rows and cabin length has not been changed from the 77G to the 77K, I find this claim hard to understand. Is Blackbird_hkg suggesting the centre seats are not aligned to the 3-seaters in the same row?
percysmith is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 18, 8:13 pm
  #115  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: Lowly CX & IHG
Posts: 347
Originally Posted by percysmith View Post
Given # of seat rows and cabin length has not been changed from the 77G to the 77K, I find this claim hard to understand. Is Blackbird_hkg suggesting the centre seats are not aligned to the 3-seaters in the same row?
Originally Posted by Blackbird_hkg View Post

Donít have any documentation but I was taking B-HNE having the seat 42D tonight.

The difference in seat pitch itch is just too obvious that can be easily observed by eyes. I havenít advised to the ISM but she agreed but has no clue of course.
B-HNE is a 773 (non-ER) per FT Fleet Info i.e. 73Z->77P and from the CX fleet page there is in fact an extra centre row fitted in the front section (39-52 -> 39-53). Diagrams are not exactly drawn to scale I assume, but there seems to be some changes at least.
watery is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 18, 8:45 pm
  #116  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: China
Posts: 1,499
Recently flew on SQ's new 787 that is 9 abreast. I guess same issue as CX B777 - great IFE, shame about the seat width. An A330 is noticeably better, even if the screen is smaller.
peasant is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 18, 9:41 am
  #117  
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by watery View Post
B-HNE is a 773 (non-ER) per FT Fleet Info i.e. 73Z->77P and from the CX fleet page there is in fact an extra centre row fitted in the front section (39-52 -> 39-53). Diagrams are not exactly drawn to scale I assume, but there seems to be some changes at least.
thatís very disappointing - not only the width of the seat reduced, but with an extra centre row being fitted the seats in centre row just are horrible.
Blackbird_hkg is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 18, 5:35 pm
  #118  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Depends
Posts: 14,359
Originally Posted by watery View Post
B-HNE is a 773 (non-ER) per FT Fleet Info i.e. 73Z->77P and from the CX fleet page there is in fact an extra centre row fitted in the front section (39-52 -> 39-53). Diagrams are not exactly drawn to scale I assume, but there seems to be some changes at least.
Oh the 77P
New row 53DEFG. Back two cabins are renumbered from 54 as a result

Making front Y cabin middle seats the cabin to avoid
percysmith is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 18, 9:04 pm
  #119  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: SFO/HKG
Programs: ex-UA 1K, AA EXP, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 396
Originally Posted by peasant View Post
Recently flew on SQ's new 787 that is 9 abreast. I guess same issue as CX B777 - great IFE, shame about the seat width. An A330 is noticeably better, even if the screen is smaller.
The 9-across 787 should actually have more personal space than the 10-across 777. So if you think the 787 was bad....
triplefives is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 18, 9:11 pm
  #120  
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Depends
Posts: 14,359
Originally Posted by triplefives View Post
The 9-across 787 should actually have more personal space than the 10-across 777. So if you think the 787 was bad....
Using the same calculation and assumptions underpinning CX's 17.2 inch 10-abreast claim, 787 comes off as a 17.62 inch seat https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...2be9430b45.png
percysmith is online now  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread