Is this United's new business class layout?
Mar 15, 2016, 10:40 pm
#301
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: SEA
Programs: UA SP, DL SM MM, AS 75K, SPG Platinum, Hyatt Diamond.
Posts: 2,596
VA did not have a first class, it had PE, Business, and Economy. Its "Business" product "Upper Class" was a hyrbrid that was more true first class than business.
United however went to lie flat in Business while still having a very good First Class. At the time the product clearly was leading (BA being the only other one I can think of with lie flat in Business and a true first class product).
Back in 2012-13 the defenders here used to tout how UA did not need to compete on soft product as its hard product was so much better in J.
But the times, they be changing....
As I noted earlier, if this product avoids the footwell issues (on the sCO product) and the narrowness of the sUA product, and has good padding, I think it will do ok. No one will write about how the product is great, but it can be sold (due to more density) at a lower price to corporate accounts and at discount. That may realistically be UAs market at this point. United is in no way a leading airline at this point.
However, as OALs continue to improve their product, having "middling" product will cost UA more and more of its high value traffic (those paying for full fare J), and if this seat is not big enough in length and width, it will not work out well given how UA lags in other aspects of the travel experience.
United however went to lie flat in Business while still having a very good First Class. At the time the product clearly was leading (BA being the only other one I can think of with lie flat in Business and a true first class product).
Back in 2012-13 the defenders here used to tout how UA did not need to compete on soft product as its hard product was so much better in J.
But the times, they be changing....As I noted earlier, if this product avoids the footwell issues (on the sCO product) and the narrowness of the sUA product, and has good padding, I think it will do ok. No one will write about how the product is great, but it can be sold (due to more density) at a lower price to corporate accounts and at discount. That may realistically be UAs market at this point. United is in no way a leading airline at this point.
However, as OALs continue to improve their product, having "middling" product will cost UA more and more of its high value traffic (those paying for full fare J), and if this seat is not big enough in length and width, it will not work out well given how UA lags in other aspects of the travel experience.
Last edited by transportbiz; Mar 15, 2016 at 10:47 pm
Mar 15, 2016, 10:58 pm
#302
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: SFO, ORD, IAD
Programs: UA Plat, AA Plat Pro, Hyatt Glob, Marriott Plat
Posts: 355
This Recaro seat (CL6710) does also look very similar
https://youtu.be/vIkbqQcXFeU
https://youtu.be/vIkbqQcXFeU
It seems that Recaro actually worked with Acumen to develop their CL6710 seat, and it is based on the layout of the Optima. They talk about Recaro "refining Acumen's concept into an actual product offering" in their press release. It will be interesting to see who ends up manufacturing the seat that United selects. However, in the design notes for the Optima/Viva seat case study it is stated that the Acumen design group holds the actual patent to the staggered layout that was posted initially in this thread. Press release here:
https://acumen-da.com/news-item/reca...d-with-acumen/
Personally, I do like that the CL6710 includes moveable armrests and the motorized footrest that the Optima/Viva concept lacks. Also, the placement of the table makes it seem like it would feel more like a true 1-2-1 than the original Viva concept.
Last edited by blahmeh14; Mar 15, 2016 at 11:49 pm
Mar 16, 2016, 3:57 am
#304
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC: UA 1K, DL Platinum, AAirpass, Avis PC
Posts: 4,599
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20150336674.pdf
While the old 2010 Cirrus materials talked about
"the seat can be positioned at a high density 43” pitch Business
Class product or alternatively Cirrus can be positioned as a more luxurious 54” pitch Business First type product.” "
http://www.jpadesign.com/_press/Crys...wards_2010.pdf
Reality is the AA 787 / 777-200 2 cabin seats are high density as are those on the AF 2 cabin 777s - all with the vaunted Cirrus base, but in the 'high density' option. UA is not breaking much ground here other than choosing a circa 2015 rather than 2009 design base.
Want really high density?
Try 37 seats in zone A of a 777
http://news.formationdesign.com/wp-c...oncept_r31.pdf
Or the 32 BA fits in zone A of its 777
http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Bri...777-200B_2.php
My tests will be seat cushion and elbow room. I am one of the rare people who uses the armrest lowering function but am always surprised at how few people do.
For me, the Cirrus on AA is not an outstanding product, but there isn't much choice in biz on US carriers. Delta's A330 config with 24 seats in the smaller A330 zone A is also clearly the high density version of the Cirrus.
Mar 16, 2016, 4:38 am
#305
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: DAY
Programs: UA 1K 1MM; Marriott LT Titanium; Amex MR; Chase UR; Hertz PC; Global Entry
Posts: 10,159
For a visual reference, here is the picture I was talking about in my original post of the designers sitting in the mock-up:
http://imgur.com/gSKF5qJ
http://imgur.com/gSKF5qJ
Still difficult to fully grasp the overall feel of the seat from static pics.
Kudos on tracking down these details.
Mar 16, 2016, 5:15 am
#306
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NYC (Primarily EWR)
Programs: UA 1K / *G, Marriott Bonvoy Gold; Avis PC
Posts: 9,011
For a visual reference, here is the picture I was talking about in my original post of the designers sitting in the mock-up:
http://imgur.com/gSKF5qJ
http://imgur.com/gSKF5qJ
Mar 16, 2016, 8:03 am
#307
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SRQ, PDX
Programs: UA 1 MM, AA, DL
Posts: 930
Mar 16, 2016, 8:52 am
#308
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,454
I wouldn't put a great deal of stock in any mockups as an ironclad predictor of how the customer-finished product will look, especially in terms of cushion firmness, retractable armrests, partitions, etc. These reflect more of a proof-of-concept than a refined production seat.
I still am skeptical that the Recaro CL6710 is the new seat. For starters, it lacks the inline center/window seats of the proposed UA layout and retains the same wasted 'walkway' between the outboard aisle seats and sidewall that is inherent to the Solstys-type arrangement. This 'lost' square footage (a significant volume in a large cabin) is exactly what Acumen was seeking to eliminate, or make more useful, with its concept cabins. Perhaps Recaro is the manufacturer using the Acumen Optima/Viva patent on license, but I believe the Acumen design and renderings most closely presage what we'll - eventually - see United announce.
I still am skeptical that the Recaro CL6710 is the new seat. For starters, it lacks the inline center/window seats of the proposed UA layout and retains the same wasted 'walkway' between the outboard aisle seats and sidewall that is inherent to the Solstys-type arrangement. This 'lost' square footage (a significant volume in a large cabin) is exactly what Acumen was seeking to eliminate, or make more useful, with its concept cabins. Perhaps Recaro is the manufacturer using the Acumen Optima/Viva patent on license, but I believe the Acumen design and renderings most closely presage what we'll - eventually - see United announce.
Mar 16, 2016, 10:15 am
#309
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: SEA
Programs: UA SP, DL SM MM, AS 75K, SPG Platinum, Hyatt Diamond.
Posts: 2,596
Hasn't anyone here been one of the many test focus groups on this seat? They would know for sure what's it all about (I realize they'd break a non-disclosure though). The guy laying on his side looks horribly uncomfortable to me, also, any length of time (more than 2 hours) in that position will cause nerve pinching and circulatory issues in the shoulders, arms, and hands. The body will send pain signals about this, in order do effect a re-position...normally we can do this in our sleep, but in such cramped quarters, you'll probably wake up in the attempt. I actually, think what UA will succeed in selling with this product is Premium Economy OAL's.
Mar 16, 2016, 10:15 am
#310
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: SEA, WAS, PEK
Programs: UA 3K UGS 3MM
Posts: 2,176
Let's be honest, CO's Business"First" was never a hybrid. It was always a J product that CO somehow tricked their hub-captive customers into thinking it was a hybrid.
Mar 16, 2016, 10:33 am
#311
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: ORD-LAS
Programs: UA MM 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Titanium Elite
Posts: 4,419
As someone who just flew on a 747 in GF, boy those seats will be missed. I forgot how nice and comfy those seats were. Ya, they have a small screen, but boy were those things comfy and my 6 foot frame fit perfectly well.
If the investigating reporting in this thread is correct, those seats look to be worse than the current BF seat sUA or sCO have. If this is correct, I would rather they don't change the seats.
FYI, at first I agreed that I was ok with this new config, but if the pictures mean anything, which they don't, then this will be a bad decision.
Hoping this is not the seat shown on the previous posts..
If the investigating reporting in this thread is correct, those seats look to be worse than the current BF seat sUA or sCO have. If this is correct, I would rather they don't change the seats.
FYI, at first I agreed that I was ok with this new config, but if the pictures mean anything, which they don't, then this will be a bad decision.
Hoping this is not the seat shown on the previous posts..
Mar 16, 2016, 10:56 am
#312
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 402
Generally a smaller cabin too.
It was absolutely a hybrid when it was introduced nearly 20 years ago. And even later, blew way anything that DL, AC, or VS offered in terms of service. CO was late to the lie flat game, which made the BF service much more difficult to differentiate with other carriers who introduced flat beds in Business Class, despite better service levels.
Mar 16, 2016, 11:05 am
#313
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,454
It was absolutely a hybrid when it was introduced nearly 20 years ago. And even later, blew way anything that DL, AC, or VS offered in terms of service. CO was late to the lie flat game, which made the BF service much more difficult to differentiate with other carriers who introduced flat beds in Business Class, despite better service levels.
United's current, dated BF product is firmly within the realm of business classes (a solid one, however), and even if it refreshes aspects of the service, it would be completely out of character, and not at all cost-effective, for United to attempt to exceed the business class service standards adopted by many carriers it competes with. I think the best we can hope for, at this point, is a soft product that compares with DeltaONE... and I'm not optimistic we will see that level of investment.
That's why I think UA should drop the BF nomenclature. It's clunky and a vestige of a bygone era. Time for the company to streamline its product offering and begin to differentiate from its precursors.
Mar 16, 2016, 11:09 am
#314
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles & Orange County, CA
Programs: Wouldn't you like to know?!
Posts: 23,822
The pictures that have been posted here so far make UA's new design look FAR SUPERIOR than AA's current J seats on the 787 and 772. Even though AA supposedly has "1-2-1" - it's the absolute WORST "1-2-1" I have ever sat in my life. First of all, you have 0 privacy. Every single seat looks directly into your neighbor across from you. Secondly, the middle seat wall dividers cannot be adjusted by the passenger and most FAs are clueless about how to use them. This means, you have 2 neighbors staring at you. Then, your seat would wobble and move around whenever your neighbor adjusts his or her seat. Last but not least, AA's seats are just as narrow. Take a look:
The person in the picture is an average sized adult 5'10" average built and he could not lie flat on his back unless he moved his armed upward wrapping around his head. He barely fit. I have been on the 772 version on AA and they are absolutely atrocious.
So, honestly, the pictures I've seen here with UA's new design is still far superior to AA's.
The person in the picture is an average sized adult 5'10" average built and he could not lie flat on his back unless he moved his armed upward wrapping around his head. He barely fit. I have been on the 772 version on AA and they are absolutely atrocious.
So, honestly, the pictures I've seen here with UA's new design is still far superior to AA's.
Mar 16, 2016, 11:19 am
#315
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,617
I wouldn't put a great deal of stock in any mockups as an ironclad predictor of how the customer-finished product will look, especially in terms of cushion firmness, retractable armrests, partitions, etc. These reflect more of a proof-of-concept than a refined production seat.