Emirates orders 40 Boeing 787-10 Dreamliners at DAS
Nov 12, 2017, 12:57 pm
#16
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto - YYZ
Programs: Aeroplan/Hilton Gold/Marriott Bonvoy Titanium/Accor/Hyatt Gold Passport
Posts: 5,899
Nov 12, 2017, 1:06 pm
#17
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Economy, mostly :(
Programs: Skywards Gold
Posts: 7,801
Nov 12, 2017, 1:27 pm
#18
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: LON, PDX
Programs: DL PM, AS MVP 75K, HH/SPG/MR Gold, Amex Plat, PRG, CSR
Posts: 2,064
707, 727, 737, 747, 777, and 787 all just happen to have fuselage widths that are neatly divided by 17" ±0.1" seats. I hardly think this is a coincidence.
There was certainly some window dressing about 8-across, but that yields seats and armrests that look more like tight PE. Boeing designs planes for 17" seats, regardless of what they claim.
Nov 12, 2017, 1:42 pm
#19
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Economy, mostly :(
Programs: Skywards Gold
Posts: 7,801
I think the answer is pretty clear when you look at the seat width of nearly every Boeing made for the last 60 years.
707, 727, 737, 747, 777, and 787 all just happen to have fuselage widths that are neatly divided by 17" ±0.1" seats. I hardly think this is a coincidence.
There was certainly some window dressing about 8-across, but that yields seats and armrests that look more like tight PE. Boeing designs planes for 17" seats, regardless of what they claim.
707, 727, 737, 747, 777, and 787 all just happen to have fuselage widths that are neatly divided by 17" ±0.1" seats. I hardly think this is a coincidence.
There was certainly some window dressing about 8-across, but that yields seats and armrests that look more like tight PE. Boeing designs planes for 17" seats, regardless of what they claim.
Nov 12, 2017, 1:49 pm
#20
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: LON, PDX
Programs: DL PM, AS MVP 75K, HH/SPG/MR Gold, Amex Plat, PRG, CSR
Posts: 2,064
Did not know that, interesting, but does that account for the interior padding and air conditioning and width of aisles, which aren't always the exact same width as a seat, what about the lost space through the curvature of the fuselage and possibly an inch or two from armrests? Just seems that a couple inches more than 17" per seat might be required.
Nov 12, 2017, 9:04 pm
#21
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: AA Gold AAdvantage Elite, Rapids Reward
Posts: 38,329
Nov 13, 2017, 1:33 am
#22
Moderator: Emirates Skywards and Qatar Airways Privilege Club
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: 12R/30L
Programs: EK Gold|EY Gold|Bonvoy Ambassador| IHG Plat|HHonors Diamond
Posts: 2,818
I'm excited yet somewhat disappointed. Personally prefer the A350s to the 787, as a passenger I never felt the benefit of the technological advances and thought the plain felt cheap
Nov 13, 2017, 2:01 pm
#25
Ambassador: Emirates
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: UK/AU
Programs: QF P1 + LTS, EK Gold, BAEC Gold, QR Gold, IHG Ambassador
Posts: 1,150
I've found that the flying the 787 regularly has far fewer side effects than frequently flying on the 77W. I don't get to do it that often but I feel the difference when I do.
The cabin pressure, humidity and ride quality are far superior in the 787. I'm looking forward to flying these on DXB-EU routes!
The cabin pressure, humidity and ride quality are far superior in the 787. I'm looking forward to flying these on DXB-EU routes!
Nov 13, 2017, 3:12 pm
#26
Ambassador: Emirates Airlines
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 18,618
I've found that the flying the 787 regularly has far fewer side effects than frequently flying on the 77W. I don't get to do it that often but I feel the difference when I do.
The cabin pressure, humidity and ride quality are far superior in the 787. I'm looking forward to flying these on DXB-EU routes!
The cabin pressure, humidity and ride quality are far superior in the 787. I'm looking forward to flying these on DXB-EU routes!
Nov 13, 2017, 3:18 pm
#27
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Denmark
Programs: Skywards, Silver
Posts: 54
The 787 would be ideal for the shorter routes between DXB and Europe/ME/India.
But I shiver with the thought of them replacing the 777's on some of the long-distance runs.
Never will I forget spending 3 days in bed with a blue, swollen foot after a lovely 10 hour trip in Y on a Qatar 787.
I also did not enjoy having to spend those 10 hours with my arms crossed, because resting them would mean my right elbow would get bumped by everyone passing through the aisle, and the left would be resting on the man-boob of my neighbour.
The 777 is already cramped as it is, but at least you don't have to share 50% of that cramped legroom with an entertainment box, and unless your neighbour is obese, you can actually rest your arms.
But I shiver with the thought of them replacing the 777's on some of the long-distance runs.
Never will I forget spending 3 days in bed with a blue, swollen foot after a lovely 10 hour trip in Y on a Qatar 787.
I also did not enjoy having to spend those 10 hours with my arms crossed, because resting them would mean my right elbow would get bumped by everyone passing through the aisle, and the left would be resting on the man-boob of my neighbour.
The 777 is already cramped as it is, but at least you don't have to share 50% of that cramped legroom with an entertainment box, and unless your neighbour is obese, you can actually rest your arms.
Nov 13, 2017, 3:19 pm
#28
Ambassador: Emirates
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: UK/AU
Programs: QF P1 + LTS, EK Gold, BAEC Gold, QR Gold, IHG Ambassador
Posts: 1,150
Cabin configurations aside, the only thing I noticed between them is that the XWB is slightly quieter. Then again my 350 experience was VN, and my 787 NZ and ANA....so it could be the service colouring my judgment.
Nov 13, 2017, 3:29 pm
#29
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Economy, mostly :(
Programs: Skywards Gold
Posts: 7,801
The 787 would be ideal for the shorter routes between DXB and Europe/ME/India.
But I shiver with the thought of them replacing the 777's on some of the long-distance runs.
Never will I forget spending 3 days in bed with a blue, swollen foot after a lovely 10 hour trip in Y on a Qatar 787.
I also did not enjoy having to spend those 10 hours with my arms crossed, because resting them would mean my right elbow would get bumped by everyone passing through the aisle, and the left would be resting on the man-boob of my neighbour.
The 777 is already cramped as it is, but at least you don't have to share 50% of that cramped legroom with an entertainment box, and unless your neighbour is obese, you can actually rest your arms.
But I shiver with the thought of them replacing the 777's on some of the long-distance runs.
Never will I forget spending 3 days in bed with a blue, swollen foot after a lovely 10 hour trip in Y on a Qatar 787.
I also did not enjoy having to spend those 10 hours with my arms crossed, because resting them would mean my right elbow would get bumped by everyone passing through the aisle, and the left would be resting on the man-boob of my neighbour.
The 777 is already cramped as it is, but at least you don't have to share 50% of that cramped legroom with an entertainment box, and unless your neighbour is obese, you can actually rest your arms.
On a serious note: the old 777s have entertainment boxes, this is more an issue with the seat manufacturer and actual IFE design, as far as I can tell the latest versions of EK's ICE don't have any underseat box, or if they do it's very narrow and flat under the seat - I don't see why the same couldn't be implemented in a 787.
Nov 14, 2017, 1:19 am
#30
Ambassador: Emirates Airlines
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 18,618
