Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Discontinued Programs/Partners > United Mileage Plus (Pre-Merger)
Reload this Page >

Status of UA's 777 Conversion to new International First, Business and Economy Seats

Status of UA's 777 Conversion to new International First, Business and Economy Seats

 
Old Nov 7, 10, 6:10 pm
  #1336  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Midlands, United Kingdom
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 331
Originally Posted by harston_boy View Post
The UA Cargo site gives information for flights 7 days ahead of departure and can be found at www.unitedcargo.com. You'll need to select the "flight schedules" link and enter your departure date and airport codes.
Seems to be MOSTLY reliable...

UA935 LHR-LAX Sunday 7th November was showing the new config seat maps for weeks... UA Cargo had it as a 77Q until Thursday, then suddenly it changed to a B777 (although the seat maps on .bomb were still showing new config), so I was getting all prepared for losing the specific seat I had allocated (row 6 doesn't exist on the old config!)... Fortunately, Saturday morning (i.e. yesterday) it changed back to a 77Q
Skymonster is offline  
Old Nov 7, 10, 7:23 pm
  #1337  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Programs: United 1k
Posts: 133
SFO -LHR is by far the most reliable, then LAX and DEN - LHR. It seems that SFO-LHR is now "dealt with" and is all new configs (yay! - I fit them very well, 6'1" and 165, and they really are very comfortable. Flying upstairs over the Pacific is my favorite thing right now).

Used to always fly over to LHR through LAX. Now I am spending a lot more time in SFO.

I am amazingly lucky, never lost a SWU because of a 777 config. plane change, and certainly never lost a paid for seat.

Last edited by Robert N; Nov 7, 10 at 7:40 pm
Robert N is offline  
Old Nov 8, 10, 7:58 am
  #1338  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 73
Just flew on the new 777 from LHR-LAX.

Hated it.

Ridiculously narrow. I was in the row 6-7 section. It felt cramped. While the flat bed was nice, the 8-across seating was the deal breaker. I mean...c'mon...it's only 9 across in economy. Edited to add: i'm 6 ft, 175, 33 waist, 42 chest....i'm a normal sized guy...and this was cramped.

My money is going to pretty much anyone else next time.

Last edited by thomasj; Nov 8, 10 at 8:03 am Reason: basically saying that i'm not a big tub of guts
thomasj is offline  
Old Nov 8, 10, 8:10 am
  #1339  
Original Member, Ambassador: External Miles and Points Resources
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Digital Nomad Wandering the Earth - Currently in CAPE TOWN, SOUTH AFRICA
Posts: 55,961
Originally Posted by kokonutz View Post
Interesting thought on the upgrade. I'll go ask at the transfer desk!
At 20k miles AND $500 each we passed on the upgrade.

But I did send a note to 1kvoice requesting a partial refund of our Z fares.

My feeling is that United only delivered 75% of what they sold me (100% on the outbound, only 50% on the return). We'll see if they agree or not.
kokonutz is offline  
Old Nov 8, 10, 3:38 pm
  #1340  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Programs: United 1k
Posts: 133
Originally Posted by thomasj View Post
Just flew on the new 777 from LHR-LAX.

Hated it.

Ridiculously narrow. I was in the row 6-7 section. It felt cramped. While the flat bed was nice, the 8-across seating was the deal breaker. I mean...c'mon...it's only 9 across in economy. Edited to add: i'm 6 ft, 175, 33 waist, 42 chest....i'm a normal sized guy...and this was cramped.

My money is going to pretty much anyone else next time.
I feel a bit pathetic as a UAL salesman, but if you want flat beds you are in 8 abreast. I do not think anyone does 7 abreast 777 fat bed business class, apart from SIA who do not do the route (and with whom it is 4 abreast - same as F). In United J, my boyfriend (6'3" 220 lbs - big soab) is not happy in the middle of the plane, but he is okay on the aisle or by a window. If he is on his own he tends to fight his way (buys a ticket or does it on points) into first, but he copes in J.

If you're not that overwhelmed by flat bed seats, then totally fair enough. But if you want them, I think you are stuck with 8 abreast.
Robert N is offline  
Old Nov 8, 10, 4:59 pm
  #1341  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,679
Originally Posted by Robert N View Post
I feel a bit pathetic as a UAL salesman, but if you want flat beds you are in 8 abreast. I do not think anyone does 7 abreast 777 fat bed business class, apart from SIA who do not do the route (and with whom it is 4 abreast - same as F).

If you're not that overwhelmed by flat bed seats, then totally fair enough. But if you want them, I think you are stuck with 8 abreast.
NZ within *A and VS (not in *A) fly the LHR-LAX direct route and have non 8-abreast flat-bed J
pnsnkr is offline  
Old Nov 8, 10, 4:59 pm
  #1342  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SEA, but up and down the coast a lot
Programs: OneSky Alliance Elite+ with Zirconium and oak leaf cluster, Braniff Unobtainium
Posts: 19,826
If you're not that overwhelmed by flat bed seats, then totally fair enough. But if you want them, I think you are stuck with 8 abreast.
I'd amend that to "If you want flat-bed C and and an F section". If UA ditched F, they could use the space to do herringbone C ala CO/AC/VS/NZ.

Keep in mind that part of the deal with having F and C is you can't make C too nice compared to F. Otherwise, nobody will upsell to F.
eponymous_coward is offline  
Old Nov 8, 10, 7:03 pm
  #1343  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,657
Originally Posted by eponymous_coward View Post
I'd amend that to "If you want flat-bed C and and an F section". If UA ditched F, they could use the space to do herringbone C ala CO/AC/VS/NZ.
.
When did CO get herringbone seating ala AC/VS/NZ??
worldtrav is offline  
Old Nov 8, 10, 7:12 pm
  #1344  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: EWR, PHL
Programs: UA1k 3MM, AA Plt, peasant on everybody else, elite something or other at a bunch of hotels.
Posts: 4,594
Originally Posted by eponymous_coward View Post
I'd amend that to "If you want flat-bed C and and an F section". If UA ditched F, they could use the space to do herringbone C ala CO/AC/VS/NZ.
I don't think CO new C has the herringbone layout. They are 2-2-2 on the 777's, but not herringbone. See here.
1kBill is offline  
Old Nov 8, 10, 8:45 pm
  #1345  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SEA, but up and down the coast a lot
Programs: OneSky Alliance Elite+ with Zirconium and oak leaf cluster, Braniff Unobtainium
Posts: 19,826
I could swear they were putting in herringbone in ONE of their configurations... but that was US.

Last edited by eponymous_coward; Nov 9, 10 at 1:46 am Reason: eye kant spelle gud
eponymous_coward is offline  
Old Nov 8, 10, 10:07 pm
  #1346  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Blair and Brown's Broken Britain
Programs: Lifetime Gold, Global Entry, Hertz PC, and my wallet
Posts: 19,639
Originally Posted by Robert N View Post
SFO -LHR is by far the most reliable, then LAX and DEN - LHR. It seems that SFO-LHR is now "dealt with" and is all new configs (yay! - I fit them very well, 6'1" and 165, and they really are very comfortable. Flying upstairs over the Pacific is my favorite thing right now).

Used to always fly over to LHR through LAX. Now I am spending a lot more time in SFO.

I am amazingly lucky, never lost a SWU because of a 777 config. plane change, and certainly never lost a paid for seat.
I hope you are right on this. For my LHR-SFO flight last Saturday it changed from new-old-new-old since 28th September when I booked and I do not want to go through that again this week even once. It has happened to me on each flight since August on the SFO-LHR route and it drives me nuts.
Silver Fox is offline  
Old Nov 8, 10, 11:43 pm
  #1347  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northeast Kansas | Colorado Native
Programs: Amex, UA *G, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott LT Gold, NEXUS, TSA Disparager Unobtanium
Posts: 20,772
Originally Posted by 1kBill View Post
I don't think CO new C has the herringbone layout. They are 2-2-2 on the 777's, but not herringbone. See here.
Interesting that CO has 2-2-2.. I kind of like that, but they have more space without F. I guess UA could try 2-3-2 again in C, but we would still loose seats..
FriendlySkies is online now  
Old Nov 9, 10, 4:35 am
  #1348  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,043
Are there any birds at SFO getting converted at the moment?
UAL awesome is offline  
Old Nov 9, 10, 7:53 am
  #1349  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,657
Originally Posted by UAL awesome View Post
Are there any birds at SFO getting converted at the moment?
Yes, N788UA is in.

Bookmark this wiki, it tells you everything you need to know:

http://www.flyerguide.com/wiki/index...sions_%28UA%29
worldtrav is offline  
Old Nov 9, 10, 7:04 pm
  #1350  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Programs: United 1k
Posts: 133
Originally Posted by cschrobs View Post
w/r/t Economy on the 777 (the new business class config). Can anyone recommend the best E+ seat for a very tall passenger? It looks to me that it comes down to row 20 or row 33. Seat Guru says that row 20 AB/JK have extra legroom due to the bulkhead, while row 33 AB/JK have extra legroom due to the emergency exit. It seems that maybe 33 would be best -- but row 20 is away from the toilets - a nice plus.... Any thoughts?
No issue - exit row, row 33. A ton of leg room. You do not have to crawl over people, have people crawl over you to get out, somewhere where you can stand real easily. The toilets are not ideal, but not having a seat in front of you. A price easily worth paying.

Some people do not like the window seat, because the exit slide thing on the emergency restricts you leg room. I do not think this is a problem at all, and much prefer the window seat. It gives you something to lean against when you are sleeping.
Robert N is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread