TPJ

Ask SQ or check their Annual Report

But seriously - if it is EY-type configuration, it might be a good product. I guess we need to wait for pictures to fully assess.

EWR764

A more appropriate comparison would be AA's retrofit 772, which has 21 seats in A-zone, but with lavatories, closets and galley units between doors 1 and 2. The rumored UA configuration has 28 seats in A zone, but it would appear that all lavatories are fore and aft of the doors, with only two galley units in the center section and closets in the "dead" space at the first and last rows of the cabin.

For what it's worth, I find AA's now-discontinued 787/retrofit 777 J seats to be unpleasantly narrow at shoulder level, and not as spacious or comfortable as the Cirrus-style seats on the 77W. There is also significant wasted space in both configurations that I think this rumored UA design seeks to eliminate.

bocastephen

A few tall people in the middle will be playing footsie all night with this layout.

hirohito888

There is a partition along the middle, you won't be able to make contact with the other side, unlike LH seats.

Good point, 28 J seats between 1L and 2L means they'll need to put lav+32 J seats after 2L. There's not a lot of room left for the 11 rows of E+ and 20 rows of E- (110/196 seats).

AC 77W has same seats and fits 26 seats between 1L and 2L. I'm quite certain that if UA installed the same seats and keeping 306Y, it would be less than 60J...

tuolumne

We are all getting drunk on the direct aisle access thing. It is not the last stop when it comes to seats, believe me.

EWR764

True, but could you imagine the uproar if it were leaked that the forthcoming United J product did not have direct aisle access for every seat? It would make this discussion look overwhelmingly positive.

tuolumne

I know, but compared to Bentley-quilted, refrigerated, 23" HD seats...? All little dirty tricks from direct-govt-subsidy-EK, but compared to any western carrier? Even I have to say, yeah right!

mduell

Good seat width and usable space. No side-tables behind your shoulder or beyond your knees like LFBF or this proposed UA config.

A poor comparison due to the size of the F seats and the inefficient transition for 2 rows of J. Also note variations in lav/galley/closet configuration.

+1 ^

I don't care at all about aisle access. I like the window and get up 0-1 times per flight.

bubbashow

Product be damned...let's just let more people feel special by putting them in something for which they are unable or unwilling to spend. Ludicrous.

cova

"couple others' - do you mean AA and DL out of NYC (JFK)? I would think AA and DL would be UA's biggest competition. You said NYC (not EWR).

cerealmarketer

Not that costly, and in fact over the long run probably less so. It's the same seat bones as the current IPTE seat - they're adding finishes on 10 year old seats. Those center consoles will be familiar to any UA flier.

And UA, AA or DL would be able to fit more seats in the cabin with that EK config than their own new J setups - so it's actually a lower CASM setup.

No govt subsidy needed to do that.

The A380...

A whole other game.

JC5280

It sure seems there are a wide variety of definitions of 1-2-1 in here. Some have used row numbers as a definition. Some have used criteria such as if a flight attendant can serve you without reaching over another person. Some have used direct aisle access. The notion of how many seats across is a very grey definition it seems. If you draw a straight line across the cabin, how many does it intersect? In this case, even the carriers with the so-called definition of "true 1-2-1" have overlap with footwells.

The way I look at it (not defining by any means): The "-" in the 1-2-1 or 2-4-2 or 2-2-2 always meant where the aisles are. That goes back to early CRS system design such as Apollo and Sabre. Yes, every seat has aisle access in this set up. Then you have row numbers. Since looking at this top down view of a cabin mock up, I could not imagine they would give two seats on the window and the four in the middle the same row number. It would be entirely too confusing for any passenger. So now you have 7-8 rows in the A zone. Looks like 1-2-1 to me, but a modified version. But only modified from the first few carriers that chose a layout like this for J. And we will really know for sure how it compares once someone has actually sat in one of these seats.

But I suppose its more popular to complain about things on here. SMH

cerealmarketer

AC has a pseudo premium economy section with 9 across, and UA has 1 less lav in coach.

You can see the full UA layout here

http://www.briansumers.com/home/is-t...eing-777-300er

J extends well past the wing, with only 4 rows of coach ahead of 3L.

UA makes coach suffer more to accomplish it with 10 across all the way through and the missing lav. Again, they could have gone with the same seats as AC/AF and had the same seat count.

Interesting they manage to put 2 lavs forward of door 1L...that will be an interesting squeeze.

EWR764

It should be fine... pilot rest has been relocated to the upper lobe above A-zone, so the two bunks that occupy this space in the sCO 777s are redundant. The sUA 777s have a lav in the forwardmost position, which is slightly smaller, and a large closet just aft. The closet is relocated inboard where the second lav is currently on sUA 777s, and will replaced which a deeper, possibly handicapped-accessible lav unit on the 77W.

I know pilots will appreciate this configuration, as they are critical of the sCO 777 and 764 layouts which require working crewmembers (i.e., not on break) to traverse at least part of the passenger cabin to use the restroom.

AndyPatterson

To me, the acid test is foot room -- the older lie flat configs tend to have smallish, triangular spaces for the feet, which for me becomes very cramped (I have long legs and big feet!). Will the foot space in these new seats be wide/rectangular, or tapered/triangular?