catocony

"An additional pair of exit doors and a flat rear pressure bulkhead increase seating capacity to 180 passengers in a 2-class configuration or 215 passengers in a single-class layout. Additional fuel capacity and standard winglets improve range to that of other 737NG variants."

The extra doors allows them to add more seats per FAA regs (passenger/exit ratio). The changes in bulkhead design allow them to physically add a row and a half of seats.

uastarflyer

The passenger/lav ratio takes a hit too

travelnlite84

The older pressure bulkheads used to have a very significant curve to them, by flattening them out, they save a couple of feet of space.

That's a good catch Mr. Catocony - most people wouldn't have picked up on that...

B787938

On the AS 739ERs, the rear exit doors are disabled as they are on UAs. AS has 16F and 165Y. Although the redesigned pressure bulkhead may mean being able to get more seats in, I am not sure it is the reason here.

According to Recaro's website the new seats offer "more living space." (http://www.recaro-as.com/bl3520.html)

What the airlines are spinning is the more living space sell. And, I get the basic math admonishment. However, AS states pitch is not impacted. So, what I am driving at: Is the footprint of the seat smaller to allow pitch to remain equal while adding a row of seats?

AS notes they will add the new seats - along with an extra row - to all 738s and 739s without sacrificing pitch.

catocony

The physical depth of a seat, the height of a seat, none of that matters when it comes to pitch. The seat is anchored to the floor. The distance between the same anchor point on seats in two rows is the pitch. That's the only measurement. The rest is PR spin. "The seats are thinner, so your knees can't tell the difference." "They're angled differently, so going from 3 inches of recline to 2 inches doesn't make a real difference".

Math is math. The new seats will be closer together. 15 rows at 31" pitch gives you 465 inches from the anchor on the first row of seats to the anchor on the last row. Adding a 16th row into the same 465 inches means that the pitch will decrease by 2 inches per row. You will be sitting several inches close together after the reconfig, regardless if they carve out two inches on each seatback for your knees.

Think of it this way - when you stand up to get out of your seat, you'll have two less inches between you and the person sitting in front of you. "Please take care not to hit their head when you get out of your seat, or use it for leverage, and thanks for flying Air Smisek."

unavaca

I appreciate the correction. I withdraw my speculation.

3Cforme

You don't point to AS remarks specifically, but if so, AS is misusing the term seat pitch. FWAAA's convention clarifies this -- 'effective legroom' -- more seats pitched (pun intended) as no reduction in pitch by airline execs and PR people who really ought to know better.

B787938

The AS news release states that after the mods, "Alaska Airlines' aircraft will provide passengers with the current fleet standard seat pitch of 31 to 32 inches and 3 inches of recline." Press release here: http://splash.alaskasworld.com/Newsr...423_045423.asp.

jetaway96

Look at the bright side, at least you don't have to look and listen to Jeff on every flight.

BF263533

My butt and legs are sore just from reading this post. The harder seats will give me a nice case of DVT. Throw a few clots, have a nice stroke!

uber1K_Flyer

This may be slightly off topics - but I wonder why they are "improving" the airbus (my read sUA planes) which I have consistently found very comfortable and have had plenty of room for any suitcase I've ever brought on board and doing nothing to the dark, prison like 737's who's overhead are slightly too small for many normal size bags?

uastarflyer

It is not off topic

And if us a question many of us who have flown many segments in UA Airbii ask - it is already a very reasonable experience in Y

But it wasn't invented in Houston, so it must go.

unavaca

As someone who has enjoyed B6 (their E- has the same legroom as E+, for no extra charge, plus power) and VX (fleet-wide Wi-Fi), to say that the current PMUA is reasonable in Y is a laughable, at best.

uastarflyer

Those 2 have small route map to speak of.

And compared to any 737 the wider seats are appreciated

We aligned upthread that adding WiFi is a definite need, and that it can be done independently of ripping out the seats.

By the way, even after the conversion your b6 and Vx examples would still hold true.

spin88

We all know where you come from, but I don't see this post as adding to the discussion? Some questions that would be interesting from your pro-CO perspective:

Is the PMUA e+ experience on the A320 better than the comparable experience that PMCO offered in Y on its B738/9s? I think it was, perhaps you disagree.

Will these "changes" to the PMUA experience on the A320s [To give us the shiny new "JeffExpereince" we must all crave] inprove that experience? Do tell.

I would agree that the B9 and VX (in Y) experience is better than UAs Y experience, but that is a comment that is not specific to the PMUA a320. IMHO of the narrow bodies in the current UA fleet, the A320s [Before the "JeffExpereince" is added to them] wins hands down in Y.

So go ahead and support this as a "change you will like" waiting to hear why...