Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Singapore Airlines | KrisFlyer
Reload this Page >

The SQ A350 - shockingly bad J-class seat

The SQ A350 - shockingly bad J-class seat

Old Nov 28, 16, 10:13 am
  #16  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SIN
Programs: CX DM, SQ KF Gold
Posts: 713
Originally Posted by TravelwhileyouEat View Post
I'm 175 cm (around 5'9) and the A380 J seats are okay, the only thing I don't enjoy is the angle when sleeping. I haven't tried the new seats.
177cm / 5'10'' here, and even I find the A359 J seats uncomfortable - I cannot even imagine how annoying it must be if you are 6ft plus tall!

While the finishing looks nice, the screen is also far too close to one's face now - to the point that if I almost got motion sickness simply by watching a film, and I am by no means a feeble flyer.

Last edited by Kiwi Flyer; Dec 6, 16 at 1:55 am Reason: edited quoted post
NetJets Germany is offline  
Old Nov 28, 16, 10:35 am
  #17  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: yyz
Posts: 1,546
I flew the 772 seat on a redeye earlier this year. Was really excited to see the upgrade in equipment from what was originally a A330. I thought the SQ seat looked so spacious and it was, in width. But length, I was cramped (I am 195cm). Still better than Y, but I would choose the CX or BR style of seats (or NH) over SQ.
grandgourmand is offline  
Old Nov 30, 16, 8:14 pm
  #18  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 7,701
Originally Posted by Volasia View Post
Out of curiosity, what are the airlines You would then rate higher?
For hard product, begrudgingly I must say CX. Greetings from a regular on the CX board and we spend a lot of time whinging about CX over there. SQ provides us nice competition for CX HKG-SFO...and I happily oblige from time to time,although F more often than J lately.

CX J long-haul hard product is indeed superior to SQ, especially if you're tall. CX also didn't goof up its A350 design - the seat is a not-much-modified slightly-spiffier version of the existing CX Cirrus J (reverse herringbone) seat.

CX doesn't look as fancy and screen is smaller than SQ IME, but what CX offers is a very solid reverse herringbone. However, SQ has CX beat on the catering and "bling" factor. (and SQ has CX beat roundly on the regional J product, where CX is a complete disaster).

You know it's bad when people are saying they'd rather take BA!!
QRC3288 is offline  
Old Nov 30, 16, 8:36 pm
  #19  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX/SFO
Programs: AA EXP; AS 75K; WN A List; UA 1K 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott AMB; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 45,585
Originally Posted by QRC3288 View Post
You know it's bad when people are saying they'd rather take BA!!
I'm still waiting for someone to say they'd rather fly UA
Kacee is offline  
Old Nov 30, 16, 9:12 pm
  #20  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Oxford, UK
Programs: BA GGL, Asiana Diamond
Posts: 655
Originally Posted by QRC3288 View Post

You know it's bad when people are saying they'd rather take BA!!
Lol, yeah, I thought someone might pick up on that!!
crazyanglaisy is offline  
Old Nov 30, 16, 9:55 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: CMH, HNL
Programs: UA, HA
Posts: 583
Any chance SQ will (be able to) fix their 350 J dimensions? Pitch-wise, I mean, not that claustrophobic foot box.

It's pretty much impossible, n'est-ce pas?
TheTakeOffRush is offline  
Old Nov 30, 16, 11:57 pm
  #22  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Singapore
Programs: QF LTG, SQ EGTP, MH Silver, SPG Gold
Posts: 4,370
Personally I think it's sleeping position that determines if comfortable or not. Their seats tend to be better for side sleepers (I am one) who curl up a bit anyway. If you sleep on your back stretched out they are pretty bad.

Last edited by Kiwi Flyer; Dec 6, 16 at 1:57 am Reason: deleted quote
lokijuh is offline  
Old Dec 1, 16, 12:15 am
  #23  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: CT
Programs: Former AA Exec Plat, driven away. Now free agent.
Posts: 34
Originally Posted by Ausriver View Post
QR A350 products is great.
+1

I'm 6' 2". Took QR A350 JFK-DOH in J this past July. Excellent seat, both upright and when full flat.

I have booked SQ A350 J for next fall SIN-SFO, but based on this thread will pursue other options.
markprice22 is offline  
Old Dec 1, 16, 2:36 am
  #24  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Programs: Krisflyer
Posts: 22
Thanks OP. I share the same height as you and I have yet to try a full experience in J.

Really wonder if it's that great, maybe I'd rather choose for PEY and spend the rest on other stuff since my utility from a J seat is certainly going to be much lower than someone who is not vertically challenged.
mys7ix is offline  
Old Dec 1, 16, 2:50 am
  #25  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 700
Originally Posted by Kacee View Post
I'm still waiting for someone to say they'd rather fly UA

may be soon with UA new business product.
jjjohn is offline  
Old Dec 1, 16, 7:57 pm
  #26  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted by lokijuh View Post
Personally I think it's more sleeping position than race that determines if comfortable or not. Their seats tend to be better for side sleepers (I am one) who curl up a bit anyway. If you sleep on your back stretched out they are pretty bad.
^ that's why I still prefer the wider seat of SQ for sleeping. Most of the other seats give me coffin like position for sleeping which I don't really like.
SQ325 is offline  
Old Dec 2, 16, 10:06 am
  #27  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SIN (LEJ once a year)
Programs: SQ, LH, BA, IHG Spire AMB, HH Gold, Accor Gold, Hyatt Discoverist
Posts: 5,413
Originally Posted by SQ325 View Post
^ that's why I still prefer the wider seat of SQ for sleeping. Most of the other seats give me coffin like position for sleeping which I don't really like.
Sleeping to me is still okay as I also tend to rest on the side, but lounging I find very uncomfortable as mentioned. Twist spine to stick feet into the cubby hole or squish my feet when elevating the leg rest and deal with the lack of recline.
demue is offline  
Old Dec 2, 16, 9:05 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,158
I agree, the lounging function added on the 2013 seats doesnt make the seat better. Its still uncomfortable to sit.
SQ325 is offline  
Old Dec 3, 16, 12:31 am
  #29  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Programs: LH, BA
Posts: 66
I'm surprised to read the comments. I haven't tried the new seat myself but I read quite positive feedback on the new J Seat that is on the new 777ER. What is so different about the A350 ? Does the plane's width makes it that uncomfortable?
flyasia is offline  
Old Dec 4, 16, 7:56 pm
  #30  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: SIN
Programs: SQ TPP, UA 1K MM
Posts: 511
Originally Posted by flyasia View Post
What is so different about the A350 ? Does the plane's width makes it that uncomfortable?
That's the difference for me. The A350 is just too small and narrow to accommodate the J seat, and the modifications to make it fit have impacted comfort. Also, there is an inescapable feeling of claustrophobia throughout the cabin, in the lavs, really everywhere...all due to the narrower/smaller dimensions relative to the 77W.

Terrible mistake for SQ to make the A350 the focal point of their longhaul flying going forward. They have not hesitated to pull the plug on Airbus failures in the past (A345), so perhaps they will wake up their idea on the "XWB" too.
crazycrab955 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: