It is getting tougher and tougher to do 5+ hr. flts. in narrow-bodies.
Oct 18, 2016, 3:02 pm
#31
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles / Basel
Programs: UA 1K MM, AA EXP, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 26,926
If OP is in LAX would be silly to backtrack to any of the above. Yes I get this FT but mileage running for all intents and purposes is dead, backtracking would make what should be a six hour journey into an 8-12+ hour journey. Besides the 777 domestic configuration isn't all that great anyway, but perhaps some may say elongated duration is worthwhile for a 767 flatbed seat.
Oct 18, 2016, 3:10 pm
#32
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2013
Programs: DL PM, MR Titanium/LTP, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 10,130
I have no inherent issue with narrowbodies. I do have an issue with the poor padding on the 738/739 in F that leads me to book away from them if possible to the A320/E170/E175 for F.
The reverse is true for Y where I find the 738/739 seats better than the slimline A320/E170/E175 seats where all the padding (such that it was) has been completely worn down. Though for Y, give me old A320 Y any day in row 7 (though not sure if the old Y is in any A320s anymore).
The reverse is true for Y where I find the 738/739 seats better than the slimline A320/E170/E175 seats where all the padding (such that it was) has been completely worn down. Though for Y, give me old A320 Y any day in row 7 (though not sure if the old Y is in any A320s anymore).
Oct 18, 2016, 3:30 pm
#33
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Between AUS, EWR, and YTO In a little twisty maze of airline seats, all alike.. but I wanna go home with the armadillo
Programs: CO, NW, & UA forum moderator emeritus
Posts: 35,426
se people are doing
Oct 20, 2016, 7:47 am
#34
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Austin, Texas
Programs: Airline nobody. Sad!
Posts: 26,062
Oct 20, 2016, 9:54 am
#35
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: PHL
Programs: UA 1K 1MM, Marriott Gold, IHG Platinum, Raddison Platinum, Avis Presidents Club
Posts: 5,271
I have no inherent issue with narrowbodies. I do have an issue with the poor padding on the 738/739 in F that leads me to book away from them if possible to the A320/E170/E175 for F.
The reverse is true for Y where I find the 738/739 seats better than the slimline A320/E170/E175 seats where all the padding (such that it was) has been completely worn down. Though for Y, give me old A320 Y any day in row 7 (though not sure if the old Y is in any A320s anymore).
The reverse is true for Y where I find the 738/739 seats better than the slimline A320/E170/E175 seats where all the padding (such that it was) has been completely worn down. Though for Y, give me old A320 Y any day in row 7 (though not sure if the old Y is in any A320s anymore).
Oct 20, 2016, 10:24 am
#37
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: TOA
Programs: HH Diamond, Marriott LTPP/Platinum Premier, Hyatt Lame-ist, UA !K
Posts: 20,061
Oct 20, 2016, 11:28 am
#38
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: PHL
Programs: UA 1K 1MM, Marriott Gold, IHG Platinum, Raddison Platinum, Avis Presidents Club
Posts: 5,271
HA, BOTH!. I'm a window guy but on shorter domestic flights, I try not to disturb the person next to me so I stay in my seat. Otherwise, it would be really nice to stretch my legs (and other muscles). Something about those new slimline F seats are really uncomfortable, worse than the 737 F seats. Maybe because I get distracted on planes with DirecTV (the only narrow body planes in UA's fleet that have IFE).
Oct 20, 2016, 11:37 am
#39
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2013
Programs: DL PM, MR Titanium/LTP, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 10,130
In fairness they appeared virtually brand new (no scuff marks or anything so might have just come out of refurbishment). It remains to be seen whether the padding on the A320 seats holds up or goes the way of the 738/739 after heavy usage (I haven't made it back onto an A320 with the new seats in F since then).
Oct 20, 2016, 11:50 am
#40
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, UA Gold, WN, Global Entry; +others wherever miles/points are found
Posts: 14,414
Some of the 737 seats have worn down but IME they're usually fine. I am not a huge fan of the new F seat - it just seems ill-proportioned in that it's too wide and too low to the floor.
Oct 20, 2016, 2:53 pm
#41
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: PHL
Programs: UA 1K 1MM, Marriott Gold, IHG Platinum, Raddison Platinum, Avis Presidents Club
Posts: 5,271
And yes, I think the height makes a big difference too
Oct 20, 2016, 3:29 pm
#42
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K and MM, Marriot, Hilton
Posts: 804
Oct 20, 2016, 5:38 pm
#43
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: UA Million Mile, Mileage Plus Premier 1K, SkyMiles Gold Medallion, AAdvantage Gold
Posts: 875
I like flying on wide bodies, but I prefer more flights with smaller planes over fewer flights with larger planes. Also, there are plenty of HNL-LAX 777 flights. And be happy you were flying FC on UA. I am (unfortunately) flying TTN-DTW on F9 soon, and would much rather fly 6 hours E on a UA narrow body.
Oct 20, 2016, 9:11 pm
#44
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: LAX
Programs: AAdvantage EXPLAT, Hilton Diamond, SPG/Marriott Gold, IHG Platinum, Citi Exec MC, Amex Plat
Posts: 1,443
Oct 20, 2016, 9:25 pm
#45
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Washington, DC: IAD/DCA/BWI
Programs: MileagePlus, HiltonHonors, AAdvantage, Starwood Prefered Guest, Marriott Rewards
Posts: 173
Once upon, circa the mid-1970s, every United flight to and from the islands was on a 747 (except for the DC-8 to JFK), with Royal Hawaiian Service. 737? They lacked the range to fly between California and Hawaii in those days. Isn't progress just grand? I complained when UA put DC-10s to HNL! I assiduously avoid the 737 with the "Slimline" seat whenever possible.