View Poll Results: How do you feel about the new RECARO seats UA is installing?
Voters: 491. You may not vote on this poll
Jun 3, 2017, 1:01 pm
Update on our Airbus Reconfigurations (Seats, Entertainment, Channel 9, etc.)
Aug 7, 2013, 12:38 pm
#586
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: DEN
Programs: AA EXP, AA Million Miles, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 2,586
Disagree. Lost of video IFE is IMO a upgrade. Less distraction as I read the book I brought on board. I'm in the minority here I realize.
Seats are unquestionably a downgrade.
I'll add one more: the one that matters to me.
Flights to all the places I need to go:
UA: Sure - even if it is an RJ
WN: Nope.
Seats are unquestionably a downgrade.
I really don't see the difference now between domestic UA and the likes of WN. WN actually provides a better product!
UA WN
Bags Pay (unless you have status) Free for the first two
Snacks Pay Free
Audio (free) None None
Video (free) None None
Wifi At cost At cost
Aircraft LOTS of regional jets All mainline type aircraft
How the mighty have fallen and seemingly continue to willingly embrace that free fall!
UA WN
Bags Pay (unless you have status) Free for the first two
Snacks Pay Free
Audio (free) None None
Video (free) None None
Wifi At cost At cost
Aircraft LOTS of regional jets All mainline type aircraft
How the mighty have fallen and seemingly continue to willingly embrace that free fall!
Flights to all the places I need to go:
UA: Sure - even if it is an RJ
WN: Nope.
Aug 7, 2013, 1:38 pm
#587
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Illinois
Programs: UAMP Premier Platinum, HHonors Diamond VIP, Marriott Gold
Posts: 21
Disagree. Lost of video IFE is IMO a upgrade. Less distraction as I read the book I brought on board. I'm in the minority here I realize.
You probably are in the minority there but to each his or her own. I don't think however that it can be argued though that removing a service (especially a free service) and replacing it with a service that all passengers may not be able to access and a service that comes with a charge for those that can access it as being anything but a downgrade. There are probably as many preferences when it comes to in-flight activity of choice as there are passengers. Some like to read, so like to play cards, some like to sleep, some like to watch their own devices, some like to watch movies/AVOD, etc..... Why not cater to as many passengers as possible however? There was a time when the only option in-flight was to read or sleep or gaze out of the window. We now have more possibilities so why regress? I was really disappointed years ago when United refreshed their 747 fleet and basically ignored coach (I know, I know that put in LCD monitors, etc...) all in the name of $. I saw that move as basically them saying if you travel in coach "you are not improtant enough to invest in but we still want you to spend your money with us" This is actually a bit worse because instead of not meeting international standard and adding IFE, they are now actually removing it in the name of $. Again the bottom line trumps ensuring a good customer experience and that makes it hard for me to want to spend my money on UA.
Seats are unquestionably a downgrade.
I'll add one more: the one that matters to me.
Flights to all the places I need to go:
UA: Sure - even if it is an RJ
WN: Nope.
You probably are in the minority there but to each his or her own. I don't think however that it can be argued though that removing a service (especially a free service) and replacing it with a service that all passengers may not be able to access and a service that comes with a charge for those that can access it as being anything but a downgrade. There are probably as many preferences when it comes to in-flight activity of choice as there are passengers. Some like to read, so like to play cards, some like to sleep, some like to watch their own devices, some like to watch movies/AVOD, etc..... Why not cater to as many passengers as possible however? There was a time when the only option in-flight was to read or sleep or gaze out of the window. We now have more possibilities so why regress? I was really disappointed years ago when United refreshed their 747 fleet and basically ignored coach (I know, I know that put in LCD monitors, etc...) all in the name of $. I saw that move as basically them saying if you travel in coach "you are not improtant enough to invest in but we still want you to spend your money with us" This is actually a bit worse because instead of not meeting international standard and adding IFE, they are now actually removing it in the name of $. Again the bottom line trumps ensuring a good customer experience and that makes it hard for me to want to spend my money on UA.
Seats are unquestionably a downgrade.
I'll add one more: the one that matters to me.
Flights to all the places I need to go:
UA: Sure - even if it is an RJ
WN: Nope.
I was so excited about the merger when it was first announced and the reality of it has been an utter disappointment:
-Proliferation of United Express to what were once mainline markets (and for many carriers still are mainline markets).
-Frequently higher fares (UA is regularly WAYYYY higher than DL and AA for recent flights I've booked well in advance i.e. ORD-LGA, ORD-SXM)
-Unhappy and fragmented work force
-SHAREs computer system
-A future of domestic flying with no free IFE (video, audio or otherwise) and questionable survival of Channel 9.
-Addition of spending requirements to Mileage Plus status requirements which makes flying Star Alliance carriers much more difficult. And honestly, Star Alliance (versus Sky Team or One World) was one of United's biggest draws for me.
-Upgrade lists regularly 40+ passengers long (which the addition of spending requirements will hopefully help)
I'm just getting UA weary!
I find myself finding more and more reasons to join my brother on the dark side of AA! We've been a UA family since the 70's and that is just a hard move for my heart to make. My heart says no while my brain says go!!!!
Aug 7, 2013, 1:41 pm
#588
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
Don't people look at other options even when it's free? Common sense tells you that airport restaurants have better food than what's served for free in domestic F (not surprising given their facilities), the cost is negligible compared to the cost of the ticket in the first place, so buying food in the airport is a pretty logical thing to do if you have time. Are there people who don't do that just because the meal on board is "free"? It seems a false economy.
e.g. I was on the 6:33 pm SEA-SFO last night, I bought a salid as I knew UA would not feed me. I usually take the AS flight, and they give you food at this time in F, but AS has been much, much more expensive on the SFO-SEA route recently, so was on UA.
Food quality is important, as the competition is kicking their butts, and once people try a real airline's F service, its sort of hard to be happy with the lowest common denominator UA approach.
Very often not -- that's the difference between loyalists and Kayakers. UA is creating a steady drumbeat of discouragements to loyal behavior which propel more and more once-steady customers into the consideration pool. They see what else is out there. They discover free IFE and more legroom on JetBlue, or more pervasive wifi on DL. They give the competition a try. Some never come back. UA has to acquire new customers to replace them, at considerable expense.
Slumping PRASM has a hundred minor culprits.
Slumping PRASM has a hundred minor culprits.
The CO management also promise they were keeping CH 9 and adding it to CO planes, and that has so happened... Another good example, why believe anything from this Management on future plans? If they wanted to add power, they could have added it, they did not.
Aug 7, 2013, 2:30 pm
#589
Suspended
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 1,961
No, it doesn't. It's easier to find the UA flights I want (or any other airline) by searching all airlines with Matrix than by searching through united.com. It's the nature of the modern world, searching is getting easier and easier. No one is going to prosper with a business model that's built around, sure, there are better choices out there, but we hope people don't bother to look for them.
Aug 7, 2013, 3:14 pm
#590
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,185
Ok, but you're saying you didn't notice a difference in the seat when in fact they are very different, even if you don't find them uncomfortable. They look different, they have different armrests, they have smaller tray tables, etc. There are differences, even on a 2 hour flight.
If you didn't find them uncomfortable on that two hour flight, then ok, thank you for sharing that opinion.
If you didn't find them uncomfortable on that two hour flight, then ok, thank you for sharing that opinion.
Aug 7, 2013, 3:36 pm
#591
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K 1MM (finally!), IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 60,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDS747
Reread the first post in this thread from UAInsider. Simple answer is Yes, 110v outlets will be installed on the Airbuses and the 747s.
I have read the first post here from UA Insider and heard the company line around power in Y in the 744s in that power will installed nose to tail in 2013. It is now August and none of the 23 744s have power.
Originally Posted by JDS747
Reread the first post in this thread from UAInsider. Simple answer is Yes, 110v outlets will be installed on the Airbuses and the 747s.
I have read the first post here from UA Insider and heard the company line around power in Y in the 744s in that power will installed nose to tail in 2013. It is now August and none of the 23 744s have power.
And people complained about PMUA being slow
In fairness, the promise of power in Airbii is only beginning 2014. But in a brain dead fashion they are only installing it in E+ not all if Y.
Aug 9, 2013, 12:41 pm
#592
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: DEN/OGG
Programs: UA GS
Posts: 1,482
Defeatured A320
UA 577 this morning on A320
No more screens
No more music
No more channel 9
But it had fresh headsets in the FC back pockets.
It had Wifi, but no streaming entertainment which I thought would replace screens one day.
Oh and it had the Jeff McMuffin
But at least the flight had a great purser
No more screens
No more music
No more channel 9
But it had fresh headsets in the FC back pockets.
It had Wifi, but no streaming entertainment which I thought would replace screens one day.
Oh and it had the Jeff McMuffin
But at least the flight had a great purser
Aug 9, 2013, 12:44 pm
#593
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K1.75MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 21,172
Any thoughts on the seat comfort? How long was your flight?
(I'm guessing you may have been in F though)
(I'm guessing you may have been in F though
)
Aug 9, 2013, 1:02 pm
#595
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Honolulu Harbor
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 15,028
This is why one should have a tablet w/ all entertainment options loaded on non-AVOD equipped a/c. And even for insurance if AVOD not working.
Aug 9, 2013, 1:03 pm
#596
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: DEN/OGG
Programs: UA GS
Posts: 1,482
And I had my iPad loaded :-)
But that UAInsider post clearly states that screen removal and streaming entertainment happen at the same time. He said " the planes won't go dark"
Blatant lie
And why they put headsets in the back pockets is beyond me
Last edited by Plane-is-home; Aug 9, 2013 at 1:15 pm
Aug 9, 2013, 1:39 pm
#598
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: SFO
Programs: AS, UA, WN, IHG Diamond Elite, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton Gold, CET 7*
Posts: 3,301
The seats (at least in FC) were the same.
And I had my iPad loaded :-)
But that UAInsider post clearly states that screen removal and streaming entertainment happen at the same time. He said " the planes won't go dark"
Blatant lie
And why they put headsets in the back pockets is beyond me
And I had my iPad loaded :-)
But that UAInsider post clearly states that screen removal and streaming entertainment happen at the same time. He said " the planes won't go dark"
Blatant lie
And why they put headsets in the back pockets is beyond me
Also of note, the flight is listed as having wi-fi, overhead screens and Channel 9, so it's important to note that relying on the flight amenities info. from the website isn't so reliable...
Aug 9, 2013, 1:45 pm
#599
Suspended
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 1,961
No, he said the planes would have WiFi when the dropdown monitors are removed. I wouldn't miss their entertainment, as I didn't watch it before; trading it for WiFi is a big win.
Aug 9, 2013, 2:05 pm
#600
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: ORD/IND
Programs: UA Platinum, Avis Preferred, Hertz PC, Hyatt Discoverist , Marriott Titanium
Posts: 742
The seats (at least in FC) were the same.
And I had my iPad loaded :-)
But that UAInsider post clearly states that screen removal and streaming entertainment happen at the same time. He said " the planes won't go dark"
Blatant lie
And why they put headsets in the back pockets is beyond me
And I had my iPad loaded :-)
But that UAInsider post clearly states that screen removal and streaming entertainment happen at the same time. He said " the planes won't go dark"
Blatant lie
And why they put headsets in the back pockets is beyond me
If you go back and reread Aaron's post it isn't clearly stated that screen removal and streaming will happen at the same time. I read it to say "they won't go dark because they will have wifi (if it's working and you want to pay for it), and sometime in the future (who knows when that will be) they will have streaming entertainment."
The only aircraft that he's given a somewhat definitive statement on which planes will have the streaming entertainment and when is the new domestic 777 configuration. For the update on those he said something to the effect that they will be the first in the fleet to have it turned on.