Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > TravelBuzz
Reload this Page >

Oh no; 11 across to replace 10!

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Oh no; 11 across to replace 10!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 11, 2013 | 7:23 am
  #16  
nux
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Programs: BA Gold, QF WP
Posts: 12,551
A few threads on this already:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trave...lace-10-a.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trave...lane-seat.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trave...lane-seat.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/emira...east-a380.html
nux is offline  
Old Nov 11, 2013 | 8:23 am
  #17  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: IAD
Posts: 2,060
Originally Posted by cynicAAl
why stop at 11 ? Make the main deck a single aisle config, and the 21.5' cabin width holds 14 across in a 7-7 config.
I was wondering something along those lines as well, and thought maybe it was a safety issue to not have more than 3 seats in a row. In an emergency you'd have to possibly climb over two people. In a 5-seat middle section, that middle guy would have to climb over two people in either direction. I wonder if that's considered the safe maximum number of "bodies" to climb over?
jcwoman is offline  
Old Nov 11, 2013 | 9:14 am
  #18  
All eyes on you!
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,760
Originally Posted by jcwoman
I was wondering something along those lines as well, and thought maybe it was a safety issue to not have more than 3 seats in a row. In an emergency you'd have to possibly climb over two people. In a 5-seat middle section, that middle guy would have to climb over two people in either direction. I wonder if that's considered the safe maximum number of "bodies" to climb over?
It's not a question of bodies to climb over. It's a question of how many people can squeeze through the aisle to the exits in the time available. Higher throughput needs fatter pipes.

The a380 was approved with two aisles I don't think it would be feasible to consider a single aisle design.
zkzkz is offline  
Old Nov 11, 2013 | 9:21 am
  #19  
10 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: ECP
Programs: DL Diamond
Posts: 1,660
If the seat width can be accommodated to acceptable/normal levels can somebody explain how this is worse than 2-5-2 for the center section or 3-3-3 for the side sections?

(Assuming of course, that they can put enough FAs, lavs, etc to handle the load of pax)
DC777Fan is offline  
Old Nov 11, 2013 | 9:22 am
  #20  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
40 Countries Visited
60 Nights
5M
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 102,617
Originally Posted by jrl22
most if not all L-1011 and DC-10 fleets were 2-5-2, so the 5-abreast center section of coach seating is really not new
IIRC LH had 3-5-3 seating on the 747 around 1980.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Nov 11, 2013 | 9:26 am
  #21  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
40 Countries Visited
60 Nights
5M
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 102,617
Originally Posted by jcwoman
I was wondering something along those lines as well, and thought maybe it was a safety issue to not have more than 3 seats in a row. In an emergency you'd have to possibly climb over two people. In a 5-seat middle section, that middle guy would have to climb over two people in either direction. I wonder if that's considered the safe maximum number of "bodies" to climb over?
By this reasoning, 3-6-3 would be allowed.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Nov 11, 2013 | 9:33 am
  #22  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
40 Countries Visited
60 Nights
5M
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 102,617
Could they omit the armrests at windows?

Or could the armrest just take width at elbow level and underneath just be a thin piece of metal underneath if the arm rest doesn't go up, so that at hip level the armrest takes no inches at all. Implicitly, I'm talking about measuring seat width at the hip rather than elbow level so that the arm rests don't count against the total available space.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Nov 11, 2013 | 9:47 pm
  #23  
All eyes on you!
10 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YVR, KUL
Programs: AC, MH, BA, AF-KL
Posts: 3,177
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist
By this reasoning, 3-6-3 would be allowed.
Shhh! Don't give them more brilliant ideas
SilverChris is offline  
Old Nov 12, 2013 | 2:28 am
  #24  
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Let me check my Logbook
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards; AAdvantage; Alaska Mileage Plan; Wyndham Rewards; Choice Hotels
Posts: 2,406
Originally Posted by jrl22
most if not all L-1011 and DC-10 fleets were 2-5-2, so the 5-abreast center section of coach seating is really not new
I remember flying Western Airlines DC-10 Spaceships LAX-SEA in 1974 and 1976 and the configuration in coach was 2-4-2.
Loose Cannon is offline  
Old Nov 12, 2013 | 3:06 am
  #25  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Community Builder
Community Influencer
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 46,452
Originally Posted by Loose Cannon
I remember flying Western Airlines DC-10 Spaceships LAX-SEA in 1974 and 1976 and the configuration in coach was 2-4-2.
Your post prompted me to scout out a photo

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Weste...eafbd075da2243

I must say that looks pretty nice.
moondog is offline  
Old Nov 12, 2013 | 3:36 am
  #26  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,452
Do some examination of DC-10:
http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/com...s/dc10sec2.pdf
Cross-sections pages 17-20, seatmaps pages 13-16.
The typical tourist accommodation, page 18, is indeed 8 abreast. 20 inch aisles, 44 inch seat pairs (NOT broken down to seat/armrest widths), some object in the middle 8 inch wide.
9 abreast economy seating, page 19, does provide seatback widths - 18,0 inch each and 2,0 inch armrests leave the space for 19,0 inch aisles. Note that 2-5-2 economy is not typical and neither is 3-3-3 - the typical configuration is 2-4-3.
First class, page 17, is 6 abreast - but seat pairs are mere 54 inch wide - 20 inch seatbacks - while leaving typical 31 inch wide aisles. Erm... you could easily have 22 inch aisles and 60 inch seat pairs. Or 19 inch aisles and 62 inch seat pairs.
Typical seatmap, page 13. Note how economy class pitch is 34 inch throughout, and 8 abreast. And the 6 abreast first class pitch is just 38 inch - 4 inches bigger.
How has your experience been in these 20x38 inch first class seats of DC-10?
chornedsnorkack is offline  
Old Nov 12, 2013 | 3:52 am
  #27  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Community Builder
Community Influencer
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 46,452
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack
How has your experience been in these 20x38 inch first class seats of DC-10?
My first experience on a DC-10 was CO 001 between IAH and LAX, circa 1985. My mom and I were upgraded to F (3 cabin), and I was simply blown away by how plush it was (I might have been young, and therefore smaller, at the time, but the pitch was a hell of a lot more generous than 38"); business class looked pretty nice, as well.

Last edited by moondog; Nov 12, 2013 at 4:59 am
moondog is offline  
Old Nov 12, 2013 | 4:11 am
  #28  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,452
Originally Posted by moondog
My first experience on a DC-10 was CO 001 between IAH and LAX, circa 1985. My mom and I were upgraded to F (3 cabin), and was simply blown away by how plush it was (I might have been young, and therefore smaller, at the time, but the pitch was a hell of a lot more generous than 38"); business class looked pretty nice, as well.
Well, look at the MD-11 linked in my post on previous page - and compare with DC-10.
The airplane cross-section is identical. So is the 10 abreast seating.
But none of the others.
The typical 9 abreast cross-section of MD-11 has exact same 18,0 inch seatbacks, 2,0 inch armrests and 19,0 inch aisles as DC-10 - but 9 abreast MD-11 is 2-5-2, not 2-4-3 like DC-10.
MD-11 has no 8 abreast cross-section. DC-10 has no 7 abreast cross-section.
First class is 6 abreast on both DC-10 and MD-11. But spot the difference. DC-10 has 31 inch aisles and 20 inch seatbacks. MD-11 has aisles 4,5 inches narrower, still at 26,5 inches, and seats 1,5 inches wider, at 21,5 inch.

And look at the 7 abreast business class. Yes, there is not the 8 inch wide middle armrest of first class - all armrests are 3,0 inch, like the aisle armrests of first class. But even with 25,25 inch aisles, the MD-11 business class seats are, at 20,5 inch seatback, wider than the 20,0 inch first class seats of DC-10.
Pitch? Well, MD-11 does not specify the pitch on seatmaps, unlike DC-10. But note that MD-11 mixed class, page 7, has 34 first class seats ahead of first doors, while DC-10 has 48 seats ahead of these doors.

Would you rather sit in DC-10 first class, 20,0 inch wide, or in MD-11 business class 20,5 inch wide?
chornedsnorkack is offline  
Old Nov 12, 2013 | 4:53 am
  #29  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,379
Originally Posted by TemboOne


Well kb1992, good for you and congratulations on your prestige level.

However, there are some pensioners on here who may only fly a few times in their golden years and who will never see the inside of an MLL, or indeed an Executive class seat or travel on anything but a Tango fare, except on their long walk back to Air Canada's new steerage class seating in 77HDs!

Back in the UK in the 50s the phrase "I'm allright Jack" was quite common.
Thanks for reminding me of it with your amusing but sad posting.
And how are all these poor pensioners going to be able to afford flights in the future? By airlines getting more people in each plane.
callum9999 is offline  
Old Nov 16, 2013 | 6:41 am
  #30  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Utah
Posts: 454
Originally Posted by callum9999
And how are all these poor pensioners going to be able to afford flights in the future? By airlines getting more people in each plane.
^

Originally Posted by Bluestar
I see what he wants - to lift the seats a few inches so that elbow level corresponds to the widest part of the fuselage - see here. However I have no idea how he envisages "raising the floor under the seats. It is certainly not going to be a structural redesign of the aircraft!

And that's before I say anything about his comment about the "proper seat count"...
What about simply making taller seats or putting them on little blocks?


On a more serious note, I do think this 11 seat thingy will work and it probably won't be as dreadful as most people thing. As long as they develop some new seats, adjust the height and remove some giant arm rests it will not be that bad.
Leviticus is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.