mpkz

Just flew 4 legs on the 787 (all in Y) - had flown 3 legs before that, 2 J and 1 Y. I got the exit row (26) on 3 flights, avoid the window seats because the curvature of the door means you can't stretch your feet out all the way.

The seats are tolerable but still worse than other types if there's no one next to you (I moved to empty rows on 3 out of 4 flights), but the one flight where I had people next to me was terrible, even with the exit row.

It's a shame so many airlines have gone 3-3-3 on the 787. Glad that the Japanese carriers haven't decided to pack everyone in like sardines.

Another thing that annoys me about the planes - the toilets. Yeah, the toilet that closes before flushing is a great idea but the lid closing thing wasn't working properly on any of the 4 legs I flew.

SinkOrSwim

Phew! That's good to know the A380 has avoided this problem, thank you.

whimike

The ever-eternal optimist of all things Qatar Airways. Unfortunately, I don't think you can put enough lipstick on this pig. There isn't anything "good" about the legroom or seat width.

Sixth Freedom

Actually there is.

On a flight which is at 66% seat factor, every single economy class passenger is (or can be) guaranteed an empty seat next to them.

If the configuration were 2-4-2 on the other hand, every single economy class passenger would be guaranteed an empty seat next to them only if the seat factor were less than 50%.

Of course, I think it unlikely that many of these services will actually be running with less than or equal to 66% seat factor and of course most passengers travel on busy flights, but in theory 9-abreast does offer this advantage over 8-abreast.

whimike

While it doesn't address the lack of legroom, it is a good point, should they be running such a low seat factor. Is there any data on the average seat factor on the routes the 787 normally runs?

On the other hand, if one typically travels as a couple, they would much prefer the 2-4-2 seating, as the 3-3-3 means they will usually be sitting next to a stranger.

lovejapan

Just to be clear, ANA is now 3-3-3 and JAL has the honor of being the only 787 operator flying at 8 abreast in Y.

Airlines these days fly loads in Y at above 66%, so let's not buy the argument of having a free seat next to you, this happens very seldom. At 16.8" width and 31" pitch, you cannot get worse (maybe 30" pitch) and having to suffer that combination on long-haul flights is a nightmare.

Saracenn

I've done the 787 a good few times in Y now, and SIN-DOH lots of times. I'm not huge, but not skinny, I am not tall by any measure. The Y seats are not great, but they are not a disaster. I am more annoyed by the IFE box eating up a significant portion of the seat in front. While it is great when you get an empty seat next to you, the SIN-DOH and DOH-SIN flights I've taken have almost all been full. If you're in the aisly, you can lift up the aisle handrest by reaching for the hidden button on the underside near the pivot. Overall, I think SQ Y seats have them beat, but the 787 is a nice plane.

enelym1978

I just flew QR945 SIN-DOH on the 787 and it was fully packed.
The seats are a bit smaller but since I;m only 5'7, still ok. Good screens but movie selection was not that great when compared to SQ for example.

The 2 passengers next to me were 2 slim ladies so we never really had shoulder or elbow problems.
Food was really not that great though....

tboons

somehow, i am quite excited about the 787, but in Y and J, looking forward to my trip in 2 months time.

the quality of the food has dropped quite significantly over the past years, but still better than CX or BA.

InternationalLiving

Seriously? I fly long-haul to both the US and Asia a reasonable amount, and QR now has the worst food. I almost never don't eat something on a plane, unless either a) the turbulence is bad, or b) the food is awful. And on two of my previous QR flights, I have left a large part of the meal uneaten. Cold, rubbery, plasticky, bland, tasteless. A far cry from a few years ago. In contrast, whereas BA went through a bad spell roughly a decade ago (laughable "breakfast" arriving from TPA to LGW, for example), I find their food really quite good these days. I haven't flown CX enough to comment, but on the flight I did take, I found their food to be very good as well...

SinkOrSwim

I fly QR a lot and their food has gone from 'surprisingly good for airline food' to 'utterly dreadful, not even sure I can eat that' in the last three years, in Y anyway. And I don't have particularly high standards, I usually love airline food!

I flew BA last month and their food was absolutely delicious (ex LHR anyway, it wasn't so great leaving Bahrain).

tboons

Maybe just down to personal preferences. Was not impressed with BA and CX when I flew with them twice this year. I think QR economy is still better and value for money