Yes, it does

oops duplicate reply

BA F vs CX F
 

There are several good reasons for choosing CX over BA in F except for teh champagne

year and a half ago years ago BA severly downgraded there Film/Video selection in F

If you sit by the window in teh back row and recline your chair to teh sleeping position your head will be in a more secluded and much wider area then on teh rest of the seats in first and certanly compared to Ba

CX has caviar

But!!! (Important) BA seves Krug 1988 Grand cuve wich is 130 Euros per bottle so you can if your good drink up your moneys worth

Also some of teh Concorde wines can now be found in BA F

Have you flown CX since they added the suites in F (several years ago)? It is a very similar suite to BA except a newer generation of the seat (from the same manufacturer) and with some extra features such as the arm rest that retracts. And CX has 12 seats in the same space as BA has 14 ... which do you think has more privacy? CX also has the 2nd (guest) seat, and a larger dinner table than BA; so this is hardly a distinguishing factor. Once upon a time BA had good wine and food, but that has greatly diminished in the past year while CX continues to improve and now has better western and chinese food, not to mention wine that is 3 times as good as BA offers. Sadly I fly BA more often than CX so I am all too familiar with these differences. On most 744s the CX seat is markedly better than the BA seat (and there are 3 different F seats on BA and 4 different ones on CX, for those who care about those minor differences).

As one who cares about these minor differences, what are the differences between the 3 BA and/or the 4 CX seats?

Er... since when? None of the CX aircraft I've ever been on have this feature.

Not having flown BA F myself, I can't really give a comparison but from pictures of the cabin the CX F cabin with 12 seats looks sooooo much more spacious than the BA cabin (which, like the QF cabin, seems awfully cramped).

A few observations based on my own recent AONE4-based RTW trip ...

CX seats are aligned with the sides of the aircraft, while BA's are angled. I found that the angled placement made BA's seat slightly more private in terms of visibility of other passengers.

On the other hand, a consequence of BA's angled layout is that your seat is
adjacent to the person behind's visitor's seat. If you are in 2A and 3A has a visitor, that person is very close indeed, albeit through a thin partition, and their every move is transmitted to your seat. CX seats, at least at the windows, are physically separated by what look like half-height bulkheads so whatever the neighbours get up to (so to speak) you won't feel it!

While I found the BA food and wines to be very good, I thought that the CX food and drink service was consistently superb ... just a whole new order of excellence. This applies to quality, quantity and presentation.

CX has a truly state-of-the-art IFE system, with an extensive library of audio and video entertainment available on demand via on-screen menus. No fiddling with tapes for movies or making do with radio-type presentations for music. And, of course, they supply good quality headphones. I would have preferred the screen to be closer, however.

Although I remain a staunch BA enthusiast, I would have to say in all honesty that, based on my recent experiences, I think CX has the stronger F product.

The screen is mounted on an arm and can be pulled away from the partition, bringing it a foot closer (this feature isn't easily seen and most people don't make use of this).

The footrest area doubles as a guest chair. It is intrinsic to the suite design so CX has had it since day 1. Not really a useful feature in my opinion, but it is exactly the same as the "guest seat" that BA boasts of having). As for the BA cabin layout, it is more cramped but the herringbone suite pattern does help quite a bit (while QF has 14 seats using the CX pattern, now that is crowded). Two years ago BA and CX F were close to equivalence, now CX is markedly better in almost every aspect.

You have to sit in them to see -- they are minor but significant refinements of the same design (probably stemming from the date of install of the seat in the particular plane). The CX seats suffered from too much flex and the last 2 designs have made the seat much more rigid (particularly with the legrest fully raised and in partial recline). The seat padding has become softer and more comfortable with better contouring. The latest BA seat change is one that I dislike -- the headrest has become larger and more obtrusive (better when upright, worse when sleeping unless you mask it with a pillow). You know you fly too much when you can tell the difference between the same seat design on different aircraft. The CX seat is quite good though and it is interesting to see how it has evolved in the last couple of years to become better (and different from the BA seat).

Yep - didn't spot it immediately, but I did get there eventually :) However I still thought it was just a little bit too distant. Just a small point overall, though.

I have the same problem with the screen. My problem is that, getting old, I wear contacts for short-sightedness. Sometimes after a long day the dryness in the cabin means that I have to take them out for comfort, but I don't even own a pair of glasses, so in this case I need to be able to bring the screen within a three feet or so.

Unfortunately, CX messed up their planning and they invited me to a focus group on future cabin design tomorrow night, at exactly the same time as they had separately invited me to dinner at the Peninsula. So I had to decline.

What footrest?

CX does not have the permanent/immobile stool that BA has. On CX, the seat itself forms the entirety of the bed; it, unlike BA, does not meet a stool to form the final foot or so of the bed.

As can be seen in these pictures, there is no stool on the CX seat, only empty space:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/263239/L/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/070149/L/

This picture shows to good effect how the CX seat reclines. As can be seen, there is no stool.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/070153/L/

I do agree that there is room for someone to sit and eat with you in the CX suites. The problem is that there is no seat for them!

Whoops! You are all correct, of course, there is no footrest on CX and there never has been (in fact it is partly why the seat is better). I confess to confusing CX with AA FS (and yes, I know there is absolutely nothing in common between them!). Too many flights on BA and not enough Krug, makes the mind go feeble. Sorry for the bad info, but I could even envision it as I typed (wondered why it looked like a b/w movie, all shades of gray).

The Pen is mightier than the focus group
 

Decline dinner at the Pen? Now that is dedication! Oh, that wasn't what you meant? How understandable. Diamonds really do have their privileges (somehow I can't see AA inviting their 60,000 EXPs for dinner at McDonalds ...). Hope CX takes the opportunity to do an impromptu wine tasting over dinner.