EWR764

Are we really proclaiming AA's 772/787 seat to be better than the rumored new UA seat, at this point?

Having flown in it, I found it rather cramped at the shoulder level. Certainly not something I would already be able to conclude as better than UA right out of the gate.

blahmeh14

If this is indeed Acumen's Optima design or Recaro's CL6710 seats (or similar), I wholeheartedly welcome this change and would hope that they install them across the rest of the fleet also.

For me at least, this layout would trump Lufthansa's 2-2-2 seating where you have to choose between stepping over someone (or being stepped over) with the window set of seats, vs. playing footsie with your neighbor in the center set of seats. Neither of which I enjoy very much, but I still usually pick the center seats for their "all aisle access" benefit.

Would probably change my current preference from LX>LH=UA to LX>UA>LH for european trips. ^

I definitely concede that they have tougher seat layout/comfort competition in Asia, though. But if you compare this to the options offered by LH, TK, and other European carriers, this would definitely be a step up or at least on par in terms of the hard-product. ^ Certainly a step up from UA's current 2-4-2.

Now if only they would roll out soft-product improvements at the same time. One can dream I guess...

UASleeper

After an initial shock ( "Oh no! A 2-4-2 design like the old sUA seats/coffins AGAIN?") and after looking at the Recaro and Solstys seats I believe that the new US C seats may be actually a good compromise between increased number of business seats (=profit increase) and passenger comfort IF the seats are long and wide enough (i.e. have at least the dimensions of the current sCO C seats). Being 6'3", I keep praying for longer seats (Recaro states that its seats can accommodate bed sizes up to 82 inches ( http://en.recaro-as.com/press/press-...ro-cl6710.html)) and an appropriate width, i.e. at least 23 inches if not more.

In the end it all depends on the above measurements and the actual touch and feel of the seat itself. An all-isle access is definitely a big plus as would be any added privacy.

All in all, I remain cautiously optimistic that the new seat will be better than what is currently on offer (sCO and sUA) and competitive with most other carriers. There will always be competitors who will offer more luxurious products. I doubt though that any US carrier will offer such a product in the foreseeable future - just because they don't have to as long as UA finds a place in the middle of the pack. SQ, LH etc awaits everybody with deeper pockets as long as the desired route is served. For everybody else, there is (hopefully) an improved UA.

bocastephen

Geez, I might be in the minority, but based on the supposed photo/mockups in the thread, I'm excited about these new seats, especially as I only sit at the window and it looks like I will have more personal space in the seat, especially width vs the PMUA seat, without someone I need to climb over.

More important to me, aside from an INCREASE in the available number of BF seats, is personal space, especially width, and a softer, more comfortable base.

From what I can see so far in the speculative images, I think the new seat and layout meets everyone's generalized criteria - more seats, more space, aisle access, functional layout, potentially more storage.

spin88

Nah, I'll hold off spinning. From the photo It looks much better than what UA currently has. That said, Width is a problem (on the sUA seat) and Length is a BIG issue on the sCO seat (footwell, generally short). I can't tell if these are issues, nor if the padding is ok, until I lay in one.

It is clear that its a seat aimed at discount "managed" corporate accounts (more seats, less per seat), not at individual travelers who pay $6-8K and can pick who they fly. Whether it is in practice good enough to attract (or not loose yet more) "un-managed traffic" remains to be seen.

No, but any quality seat will need to be a usable 6'6" min. Lots of business travelers (who are mostly men) are 6' - 6'3" You can't sell them a seat that is an effective 5'9"

From the standpoint of a corporate person tied in to a discount rate, or someone using SWUs, I agree with you. It looks much better than the current seats. The big question is if it will be - when rolled out - competitive. I don't know, until I actually fly in it.

cerealmarketer

I remember being at a FT event where Kellner presented the then-new BusinessFirst seat set up in a pod of 4.

He's in the 6"5 height range and made note of how he 'tested' it.

That was when the 777/757/787 were getting them.

The tighter 767 implementation is another story.

worldtrav

Zodiac I heard.

sbm12

How do you define "dense" in this context? Basically the same number of seats in the space as many, many other 777 operators.


Except, of course, the ones which are not. Like the EK 2-class 77W with 25 seats in a 2-3-2 layout. Or the QR 2-cabin 777s with 24 in 2-2-2. AF is still 2-3-2 on some of its 77Ws without an F cabin as well, thought others are a 1-2-1 layout. BA goes higher density and skips aisle access for all on its 777s without F. OS is higher density and not direct aisle access.

Some are doing "true 1-2-1" but not all. And it remains far from clear what the overarching need/desire/difference is.
Interesting theory. Especially given how few seats flying today on any carrier meet that standard.

EWR764

Acumen holds a patent on the Optima design, but is not a manufacturer. A seatmaker like Zodiac (formerly Weber, Sicma depending on location), B/E, Recaro or Stelia (formerly Sogerma) will build and obtain certification of a seat to the specs provided by the customer, if the customer does not choose an existing or totally in-house design. It is assured that United worked with a manufacturer in designing the product.

It would seem that Zodiac now has some additional capacity given that AA pulled their 777/787 contract... hopefully they have their issues ironed out!

Vulcan

For me, its all about the width. The sCO 777s are the minimum I would get excited about.

edcho

Lol. I can see those 744s flying until 2020 now.

kevanyalowitz

I love your fleet site, but it's worth being very clear here. There are a number of number people on here that spend 6 figures with United each year, driven by premium tickets. Since the merger that group's perspectives and opinions have been rejected out of hand by the Smisek regime. If you brand your best customers as complainers, there is a deeper problem.

Many of us, at least me, genuinely want United to succeed. What we are seeing instead is a transition not to a premium global carrier, but rather back to a captive hub mentality, in which "industry leading" is mostly spin. Four seats between 2 aisles is not a product that is competitive in many of the markets that UA operates.

This is a missed opportunity that could have probably been avoided had Oscar arrived 1 year earlier.

LASUA1K

No problem with the seat, but that won't fit on the 767's and the outdated new 787's.

The seat looks perfectly fine on paper for the 777, but they will need a different design for the 767, 787, and those awful BF seats on the 757.

EWR764

Is this some kind of objective industry standard? Again, how does this proposed configuration fundamentally differ from the Solstys layout, aside from the fact that aisle seats are not oriented longitudinally?

I would ask if you were part of the focus group that apparently sat in the seat, but would not want you to violate the terms of your NDA... then again, I suppose any commentary on the forthcoming seat could be construed as a breach. At any rate, how can we reach such firm conclusions without having any additional information about the seat, or an opportunity to try it out?

I agree, however, that this is a business class product, full stop. United should use this as an opportunity to dispense with the dated BusinessFirst branding and adopt a more streamlined product offering.

If the seat is indeed the Acumen Optima, it is designed to fit the 787 cross-section. I do not think the 757s and 767s will be reconfigured, but I believe the seat is technically 767-compatible in a 1-1-1/2-2-2 layout, depending on your perspective.

We could see 787s arrive with the new seat as early as the next round of deliveries, starting in 2017, and I do not think it is unreasonable to expect that the in-service 787s will be reconfigured.

artvandalay

Right. It's UA's business class. For all those folks who bemoan the passing of UA's "spacious" GF, this cabin is going to be an adjustment.