LongviewTX

A quick search on FlyerTalk and external relevant sources didn't reveal the answer and actually brought more confusion so I decided to reach out to you guys who should be quite knowledgeable on this topic:

The basic question is that I will fly IAH - Amsterdam in BusinessFirst on Continental this December and I'm looking for the way to get the best night rest possible.

Unless I'm missing something this question gets down to choosing between non-stop IAH-AMS on 767 and one-stop IAH-EWR-AMS / IAH-IAD-AMS on 757.

Now, the first question is that at least several months ago CO's 767s were not upgraded to lie-flat seats and only allowed 156 degree recline while all 757s are lie-flat (is that correct?). Some progress should have been done since then on 767s but I cannot figure out a way to see whether a particular aircraft on the route on a particular date has been upgraded or not? Any ideas how to check that? Will calling CO customer service help?

The second question is personal experience-based - does inconvenience of an extra stop pays off through extra convenience of having a lie-flat seat on Transatlantic leg? [assuming non-stop is 156 degrees vs. one-stop 180 degrees]

Any advice is greatly appreciated.

colpuck

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

Right now there is only 1/10 764s converted, so getting a lie flat on iah-ams is slim. All of the 752s have the lie flats, so ex ewr or iad would be your best bet.

LongviewTX

Where do you track the progress?

http://www.continental.com/CMS/en-US...tallation.aspx shows 0/12? I assume there's a more reliable source?

UAPremExecflyer

Search is your friend http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/conti...ght=conversion

LongviewTX

Thanks!

TWA Fan 1

I wouldn't modify my trip to connect through EWR or IAD just to avoid the older-school seats on the CO 767-400's.

First of all, the older seats are really not that bad. Yes, the don't lie flat, but in many other respects I actually prefer them to CO's lie-flat seats, which are not very comfortable in the seating position, get very narrow at the tip of your feet, and can feel quite claustrophobic.

But remember that you want lie-flat as a comfort element, as a convenience. Does it really make sense to not pick the non-stop just for 24 degrees of recline, when connecting at EWR is a huge hassle (with its endemic delays) that would make your trip about 50% longer?

Also, don't forget that your IAH-EWR would be on a 767-200 anyway, with the same older-school BusinessFirst seats...

hockey7711

Remember- No AVOD on all but one of the 764's.
All the 752's have the AVOD, if that matters to you.

TWA Fan 1

Right, but would you really turn a 9-hr flight into a 13-hr trip via EWR, just so you can have AVOD and 24 more degrees of recline?

And that's only on the EWR-AMS segment, since the IAH-EWR flight is on a...767-200, with the same seats and IFE and seat as the 764 you could take non-stop from IAH...

sbm12

If you're not sleeping on that first part then it matters much less that it is the older seat versus the flat bed.

I would still probably take the non-stop as I prefer the longer flight time to eat and sleep, but if one can only sleep (or does so much better) on the flat bed then taking the connection and just sleeping on the second flight might end up as more and better sleep. Even with the connection.

TWA Fan 1

Agreed, but that's the same whether you're on the 767 that stops at EWR, or the one that keeps going non-stop to AMS.

Agreed also, and whether or not one can sleep better on the new lie-flat vs. the old Barca lounger is, to some degree of personal preference. In my case, I have trouble sleeping in either one, on the lie-flat because it's so narrow at the legs, and on the Barca lounger because, well, it's a Barca lounger.

In my many overnight trips I have found that, regardless of the seat, I usually sleep better on a longer flight. So for me, I would definitely choose the IAH-AMS non-stop, even though the flight is only slightly longer than EWR-AMS. Of course, any time I can simplify the trip, reduce my potential for generalized schmertz, that's what I try to pick...

Air Houston

I agree that flying time - one longer flight offering a greater chance of sleeping - and the likelihood of issues with connections at EWR make the non-stop from IAH the best choice.

remedy

Just made two reservations to AMS (from PHX) and chose the IAH flight because
1. I am using SWU's and there are many more BF seats on the 767
2. I like the single seat center row so no one climbs over at night (or vice versa)
3. I like the longer flight time to sleep
4. I still like the Barca lounger seats - at least compared to the lie flat seats on the 757 which feel like a coffin to me when fully reclined.
5. I like IAH better than JFK or IAD as a connecting airport

I do not like that AVOD on the 767 but plan to sleep much of the time on the way over, and probably will doze off on the way back so it is not a deal breaker for me.

I suppose there is an outside chance that some of the 767's will be outfitted with lie flat seats by February or March, since the 12 aircraft are supposed to be updated in 2012, but I am not holding my breath. With the merger, there also is the possibility of cross-fleeting with UA metal, I suppose.

R&R

The lie flat seats are more comfortable with the head slightly elevated for me due to the decreased oxygen levels at the planes altitude. The BF with a slight angle are also more comfortable for me.
Am curious what percent of passengers can fly with totally flatened beds?

It seems like flying in a backward facing seat might allow for a slightly elevated head in the flatbed position for easier breathing.

TWA Fan 1

I actually find many full lie-flats less comfortable than the angled seats you could have found on the CO 777's before the conversion.

For me, it's not so much about the angle since, as you write, you can keep the full flats at an angle (or simply use a pillow).

What I don't like about the full flats is that many of them are not as comfortable in the seating position, where they feel less like seats and more like folded beds.

Also, many full-flats, while completely flat, are so narrow that they are not really comfortable in the sleeping position either.

Obviously, no one is getting a high-end bed with a king size mattress in a J section, but since there has to be a compromise, I usually prefer the seat that turns into an angled bed over the narrow bed that folds into an uncomfortable seat.

I know I am in the minority, though.

remedy

I am in the minority with you. Could hardly wait for my first flight with lie flat seats and found out that they felt claustrophobic. Maybe part of this effect was the 757 configuration. I have had one flight on a 777 and it did not seem so much like this, but they are still skinny. I do like the power outlets on the new seats, though...