United to "slim" the A320 fleet
Oct 20, 2014, 8:20 am
#271
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: MSP
Posts: 482
Oct 20, 2014, 10:06 am
#272
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: PDX
Programs: UA 1K, Marriott Plat
Posts: 11,500
No movie will distract me from the back pain after sitting in those seats for 4 hours straight.
Nov 18, 2014, 6:40 am
#274
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 303
I recently flew on a 320 with the new seats for the first time. At just over 6'1" the new seats are absolutely miserable. I have never been this uncomfortable on an airplane and have never had my legs still hurting two days later, and that segment was only DEN-DSM.
For the four flights that trip, I'll take the E170 I was on, and the return USAir CR9 and A319 (UAL went mx) any day over the new slim line seats.
For the four flights that trip, I'll take the E170 I was on, and the return USAir CR9 and A319 (UAL went mx) any day over the new slim line seats.
Dec 10, 2014, 1:32 pm
#275
Ambassador: Alaska Airlines
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: BWI
Posts: 7,390
I have long since left UA, but my parents are traveling on them today. I know the A320s have the worse slimline version (grey ones) but on their A320 flight the seats are similar to the new 'signature' slim line seats with the dark blue cover and UA logo tag on it. Are they switching the seats from the grey ones or are they just simply replacing the covers for consistency in appearance?
Just curious.
P.S. This is also probably their last time flying UA regularly as the LAX-BWI nonstop is going kibosh on a seasonal basis and the IAH flight is going down to 1x4w
connecting in ORD/EWR in the winter is not a good substitute.
Just curious.
P.S. This is also probably their last time flying UA regularly as the LAX-BWI nonstop is going kibosh on a seasonal basis and the IAH flight is going down to 1x4w
connecting in ORD/EWR in the winter is not a good substitute.
Dec 10, 2014, 1:42 pm
#276
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Just a new cover. I did LGA-IAH-LGA on these seats (including the new covere) over the past few days. It was, as expected, not quite as bad as the NEK seats but also not particularly comfortable. "Firm" is an understatement.
Dec 10, 2014, 2:44 pm
#277
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 34
I flew this last week and ended up 7F after missing an upgrade. It was a terrible seat. Too short under the thighs, rock hard, and I'm pretty sure it was narrower than usual. They should have done something where E+ was a every so slightly nicer seat, not just legroom additions. After the outbound flight, any traveler would pay to get into those seats.
Dec 20, 2014, 4:50 pm
#280
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: LAX
Programs: UA MM | BA Silver
Posts: 7,192
I do think the seat is a little short (and what's with the tiny armrest?), but the bigger issue was the discomfort in my lower back, which presented itself during the second hour of flight. No long lasting damage, and I even slept fine for a couple of hours.
The seats are not that bad, and certainly not bad enough for me to go out of my way to avoid them. That being said, they would be better with a little more lumbar support IMO.
The seats are crazy thin!
Last edited by anc-ord772; Dec 21, 2014 at 1:19 am