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

Are aircraft Y seats really shrinking ?

Are aircraft Y seats really shrinking ?

Old Oct 30, 2016, 6:28 pm
  #46  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Central Mass
Programs: Independent
Posts: 4,823
Originally Posted by weero
3-4-3 on an A380 isn't narrow mate! That's more than 18 inches per gluteus.
It's the 11 across that is tighter.
Cloudship is offline  
Old Oct 31, 2016, 8:35 am
  #47  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,250
Originally Posted by Cloudship
It's the 11 across that is tighter.
Is there such an implementation? I mean on the physical world, outside of sadistic managers' minds.
weero is offline  
Old Oct 31, 2016, 8:45 am
  #48  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 540
Originally Posted by weero
Is there such an implementation? I mean on the physical world, outside of sadistic managers' minds.
Yes, Airbus itself does an offering of 3-5-3 layout.

http://aviationweek.com/airbus-a380/...0-seating-2017

But I don't know whether that will be the A380NEO, the stretched version of the 380.
airsurfer is offline  
Old Nov 1, 2016, 8:44 pm
  #49  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,250
Originally Posted by airsurfer
Yes, Airbus itself does an offering of 3-5-3 layout.

http://aviationweek.com/airbus-a380/...0-seating-2017

But I don't know whether that will be the A380NEO, the stretched version of the 380.
So there is no such layout yet.

But 3-5-3 on the A380, is more than one inch better than 3-4-3 on the 777. Oddly enough, the 8 abreast JL 787s are the widest seat configurations out there, even surpassing the 3-4-3 A380.
weero is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2016, 4:17 am
  #50  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Originally Posted by weero
Is there such an implementation? I mean on the physical world, outside of sadistic managers' minds.
Nope...it is a theoretical that has yet to get anywhere close to on a plane.
Originally Posted by weero
But 3-5-3 on the A380, is more than one inch better than 3-4-3 on the 777.
Not really. The numbers are published that way but it is subterfuge and misdirection, just like the claims from Southwest that it would be offering wide seats on its new 737s without changing the fuselage or aisle dimensions.



They get there mostly by narrowing the armrest and measuring inside the edges. The measuring tape can show that wider number but the reality for a passenger sitting there is that you're closer to your neighbor and shoulder room hasn't changed. The touted benefit is specious at best.

(link goes to a story I wrote somewhere else; you've been warned)
sbm12 is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2016, 5:13 am
  #51  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,397
Originally Posted by sbm12
Oh boy.... And that man isn't even particularly "big boned".
WorldLux is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2016, 1:10 pm
  #52  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,250
Originally Posted by sbm12
..Not really. The numbers are published that way but it is subterfuge and misdirection, just like the claims from Southwest that it would be offering wide seats on its new 737s without changing the fuselage or aisle dimensions..
I am not claiming that 3-5-3 is a desirable outcome for the good ol'A380 ... but 3-4-3 is a reality on the 777 these days and if you take the cabin width of both planes, deduct 2 times 17" aisles from it and divide by 10 and 11 respectively, the A380 11 abreast still scores a fair bit better than the existing 777s.

As the hull curvature on the A380 is milder than on the 777, the scenario you list should also be less likely.
weero is offline  
Old Nov 3, 2016, 1:12 pm
  #53  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 540
Originally Posted by weero
I am not claiming that 3-5-3 is a desirable outcome for the good ol'A380 ... but 3-4-3 is a reality on the 777 these days and if you take the cabin width of both planes, deduct 2 times 17" aisles from it and divide by 10 and 11 respectively, the A380 11 abreast still scores a fair bit better than the existing 777s.

As the hull curvature on the A380 is milder than on the 777, the scenario you list should also be less likely.
Simple calculation:

A 380 has an inner cabin width of 6.50m and a 777 is 5.85m, which makes a difference of 65cm. And 65cm is more than a seat's width of 45cm.
So 3-5-3 in a 380 is 20cm wider than 3-4-3 in a 777. That is almost 2cm per seat.

BTW, why don't airlines choose a 2-5-3 layout instead of 3-4-3 (or 2-4-3 vs. 3-3-3), at least in a part of the Y cabins ? That allows couples seated together without a third person without compomizing seats.
airsurfer is offline  
Old Nov 3, 2016, 1:43 pm
  #54  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: 1 thousand
Posts: 2,110
Originally Posted by airsurfer
Simple calculation:

A 380 has an inner cabin width of 6.50m and a 777 is 5.85m, which makes a difference of 65cm. And 65cm is more than a seat's width of 45cm.
So 3-5-3 in a 380 is 20cm wider than 3-4-3 in a 777. That is almost 2cm per seat.

BTW, why don't airlines choose a 2-5-3 layout instead of 3-4-3 (or 2-4-3 vs. 3-3-3), at least in a part of the Y cabins ? That allows couples seated together without a third person without compomizing seats.
I don't think that's possible because the seat tracks are too far out, without extra special location-specific engineering. Also, 5 across in a 17" seat is simply inhumane.

Here's a picture of the 2 in 2-4-3 on ANA: the riser coming from the seat tracks is touching the step/aisle edge.
https://christao408.files.wordpress....1/img_1632.jpg
Make those 2 seats a total of 2" narrower, and suddenly you need a new riser design which incorporates the step/trim. In other words you're completely redesigning a major part of the seat, just for use in the 2 groups, whereas the entire rest of the plane has consistent/identical seats/risers/steps/trim/etc. I don't think airlines would be particularly keen on the additional costs of carrying spare parts for yet another type of seat.

(I realise the exit row seats are already special, but the changes there only affect the armrests/sides of the seat, and not the seat mounting/risers, plus those changes are pretty much unavoidable vs optional changes for a 2 side-group.)
televisor is offline  
Old Nov 3, 2016, 2:57 pm
  #55  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Central Mass
Programs: Independent
Posts: 4,823
Keep in mind that cabins are circular, not rectangular, in cross section. The location of the floor in relation to the fuselage makes a difference here. Also, keep in mind that seat width is measured at either the cushion height or armrest height, so that may or may not be the widest cross section of the cabin. How airbus is finding this "extra room" is a combination not only of reduced seat size, but by raising the seat height just a little, and optimizing the side walls, it can gain a little more room between the window seat and the cabin wall.
Cloudship is offline  
Old Nov 3, 2016, 11:36 pm
  #56  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,250
Originally Posted by airsurfer
..A 380 has an inner cabin width of 6.50m and a 777 is 5.85m, which makes a difference of 65cm. And 65cm is more than a seat's width of 45cm.
So 3-5-3 in a 380 is 20cm wider than 3-4-3 in a 777. That is almost 2cm per seat.
Agree on the data but not on the math.

650cm/11-585cm/10 is only 0.6cm.

The A380 is a tad wider and the 777 a tad slimmer than your data and you have to deduct two 17" aisles, so that the advantage of the A380 grows to nearly 1.5cm per seat.
That's still one bad implementation ....
BTW, why don't airlines choose a 2-5-3 layout instead of 3-4-3...
That would make for two good and pleasant coach seats per row ... can't have that in the modern world.
weero is offline  
Old Nov 4, 2016, 3:33 am
  #57  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 540
Originally Posted by weero
Agree on the data but not on the math.

650cm/11-585cm/10 is only 0.6cm.
You don't take the two aisles width into account.

The aisles are 0.50m wide (1m altogether) each which makes:

550/11 = 50cm
485/10 = 48.5cm

which is 1.5cm difference.
airsurfer is offline  
Old Nov 4, 2016, 7:44 am
  #58  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Central Mass
Programs: Independent
Posts: 4,823
Originally Posted by weero
Agree on the data but not on the math.

650cm/11-585cm/10 is only 0.6cm.

The A380 is a tad wider and the 777 a tad slimmer than your data and you have to deduct two 17" aisles, so that the advantage of the A380 grows to nearly 1.5cm per seat.
That's still one bad implementation ....

That would make for two good and pleasant coach seats per row ... can't have that in the modern world.
Partly because that would mean they would need 3 different types of seat sets, a 2 wide, a 3 wide, and a 5 wide, whereas they can use (2) 3 wide and (1) 4 wide unit.
Cloudship is offline  
Old Nov 5, 2016, 11:29 pm
  #59  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,250
Originally Posted by airsurfer
You don't take the two aisles width into account.

The aisles are 0.50m wide (1m altogether) each which makes:

550/11 = 50cm
485/10 = 48.5cm

which is 1.5cm difference.
Ehm did you read my previous posts?

You did not take the aisle into account. And you got the math wrong.
Sorry to have to say it that bluntly mate.
Originally Posted by Cloudship
Partly because that would mean they would need 3 different types of seat sets, a 2 wide, a 3 wide, and a 5 wide, whereas they can use (2) 3 wide and (1) 4 wide unit.
I agree that this sounds a lot nicer than "screw you Y pax!".
weero is offline  
Old Nov 11, 2016, 8:00 pm
  #60  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: New England
Programs: American Gold, Marriott Gold, Hilton Silver
Posts: 5,577
Originally Posted by bocastephen
At least the 319/20/21 were designed with just a little extra width to allow 18" coach seats vs the 737 that barely allows for 17.1".
That's because they've been using the same fuselage sections from the 707 up to the 757. The Airbus was designed a lot later, and because that baseline was there from the Boeing, they designed it to be wider for increased space.
diburning is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - 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 © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.