planemechanic

It will not have a six foot ceiling, but there is plenty of room in there to sit in a normal passenger seat. The bunks will be four across, four in front of the access stair, four behind, with the two seats at the top of the stairs. The bunks will be similar to this, but four across:

http://www.airtransparency.com/storage/DSC_2402.jpg

halls120

Apparently 3 of the old configuration birds aren't going to get the new international configuration. Instead, they - along with the domestic 777s - are going to be refitted with 3-4 rows of business seats up front from the p.s. fleet and become a new 777 subfleet used primarily for HNL flights.

FlyingDoctorwu

Sorry I haven't searched this thread all the way but quick question...

IAD-NRt/PEK is typically on XQ aircraft; correct?
Does that mean they have a high percentage of the new configuration?

thanks, looking to book tickets and really really don't want to be stuck in the old config.

FDW

Always Flyin

Sigh . . .

ainternational

+1. Why can't UA serve HNL in a manner fit to the destination? They should celebrate the high percentage of vacation travelers on these flights and try to incentivize flyers to choose UA because of superior hard product.

I'm not sure what the state of the competition is, but I've heard good things about Alaska F from SFO to Hawaii, and evidently it's a cheap buy up from Y.

lhrsfo

Is this meant to be a reduction in international capacity, or are the 787s intended to replace 777s?

eponymous_coward

You mean the current p.s. C seats/old C seats (that are kinda old)? Or the p.s. F seats? Or the new lie-flat seats from PMCO that are going into the p.s. fleet this year and replacing the p.s F/C seats?

If it's the first... wow, kinda silly, though I guess UA has a lot of them lying around from the p.s. fleet and their old longhaul C seats. If it's the second... uh, really? Maybe they're getting their spares from SQ as SQ decommissions Spacebeds in C?

If it's the third then that wouldn't be so bad. It would actually make sense to have a configuration like that in your fleet- a low number C seat/high number Y+/Y seat 777 config would work for ORD/IAH/IAD/EWR-HNL and possibly even some European destinations, where you have SOME premium demand, but not a ton, but you can fill Y like clockwork, because you get lots of vacation demand there. Maybe CDG?

Because most leisure travelers think like you do: price, price price, then schedule to destination. Hard product in premium classes is at best a minor consideration (case in point: AS's hard product in F is those temporary CO F seats on 738s/739s that regularly gets panned on the UA board, and their Y seats aren't much different either... and it hasn't stopped AS from flying from damned near everywhere a 737 makes sense to fly to Hawaii).

My guess is that UA is noticing this... and CO flew 737s to Hawaii. I would bet that as UA 757s get phased out their replacements on the West Coast will be 738s/739s.

14940674

They going with the first option. The C seats from p.s. will be transplanted into the selected 777s in a 2-2-2 configuration.

eponymous_coward

Pity, though I guess that's an upgrade from the "ghetto birds"...

halls120

I have no idea. Perhaps one of the UA insiders that post here could explain. My guess is that management is trying to minimize using international birds on domestic runs, which we see from time to time. Having 9 instead of 6 "domestic" 777s would give them more a/c for HNL and other transcon flights.

It will be an upgrade for anyone who scores one of the "new" seats, but given that there will apparently be fewer of them, it's an upgrade for fewer people.

eponymous_coward

That's almost certainly the idea: run ORD/IAH/EWR/SFO/LAX-HNL (plus the occasional hub-hub route) on 777 "high-density" configs, and then run SFO/LAX-KOA/OGG/LIH on 737s, as the 757s drift away from the fleet and the 763s all turn into international configs (and hopefully replace the TATL 757 routes like IAD-CDG that are pushed to the far edge of their ranges in winter).

(Dunno what happens to DEN, though. )

True, but the current F product on the ghetto birds is so unimpressive people have been known to downgrade themselves...

why fly

interesting the lay flats are 2 4 2?? however I guess they still take up a lot more space than 2 2 2

profhoff

I'm traveling LAX- FRA in Sept with my husband and will purchase business class seats. I've read these forums and checked the seat maps and it looks like my best options could be UA 932 through IAD or UA 901 through SFO.

Since 932 is the 777 and 901 is the 747, which is better? Are they both lie flat? either route works time-wise so it's just a matter of where my dollars will buy the most comfort.

Any advice?

Also, once I choose, can you point me to the forum where I can read about which pair of seats will be best for me and my husband?

Thanks!

rob_flies_ua

I would vote for 901, the 747 from SFO; I prefer one longer flight that I can sleep somewhat well on and IAD-FRA's just a bit too short for me. As well, all 747's in service have lie flat business seats, while not all 777s do. Plus, the upper deck on the 747 is great for a pair of seats.

profhoff

appreciate the quick reply.