VS legal case on seat pitches

Being a tall fella, I clicked into this artical out of interest.

On the face of it is seems a little rich to say he had no idea about the pitch before booking. However VS is quoted everywhere I have seen at 31", so maybe he has a point.

At least they didn't offer him 5000 miles in his FC account[}:)]

[Scrooge]

Interesting read..without getting nailed for copywrite..I LMFAO at the comment from VS about "about the size of seat pitch in the economy cabin and receives very few complaints on this issue"

UUUmmm..maybe they need to check a couple of wbsites...say here or skytrax...I love alot of things about VS,but Y seat pitch is not one of them.

Originally posted by jetwet1
I love alot of things about VS,but Y seat pitch is not one of them.

I reckon I must've got a 32" pitch on my last return - even at 6ft 2", it was comfortable. Yes, it's no W or J, but it wasn't as bad as I'd feared...

Cheers

Michael

[fozzyo]

Good job he didn't fly on Air2000, Air Tours, BMI Baby, MyTravelLite ... the list goes on. They only have 29"!! So I guess according to this result VS are saying that 30" is adequate legroom for someone over 6'2". I have to disagree on that.

Something I have occasionally thought about. If VS were to increase the Y seat pitch by two inchs to a max of 33" they would loose what, 18 seats a 744?

Thats a hell of a lot of seats when you mutliply by the number of flights which is obviously becomes squillions of pounds of lost revenue. But how would that be balanced off against an aggressive marketing campaign of "The largest seat Economy pitch in the UK?"

Foz xxx

18 seats at £300 is £5,400

£5,400 div by the econ seats left (285?) £18 extra a seat

Originally posted by fozzyo

Something I have occasionally thought about. If VS were to increase the Y seat pitch by two inchs to a max of 33" they would loose what, 18 seats a 744?

This is exactly what AA did with their 'More Room Through Coach' campaign, taking out seats (and loos sometimes) to give 34" in economy. Now that does actually make a difference and many times I choice to fly AA because of it when on a tight budget. However AA is now reducing it back to 31/32" and fitting more seats. Perhaps a lesson to be learned?

Originally posted by slinky09
However AA is now reducing it back to 31/32" and fitting more seats.

Shame that their brave move apparantly didn't work out. As you say, that extra couple of inches makes all the difference to us lanky, prehensile types

Originally posted by slinky09
This is exactly what AA did with their 'More Room Through Coach' campaign, taking out seats (and loos sometimes) to give 34" in economy. Now that does actually make a difference and many times I choice to fly AA because of it when on a tight budget. However AA is now reducing it back to 31/32" and fitting more seats. Perhaps a lesson to be learned?

I was about to chip in with an identical comment regarding AA. I am not sure whether it works. The reality is that a huge majority of pax choose their seat based on price and little else at the Y bucket seat end of the market.

Of course, the way VS and latterly BA decided to address this was by introducing the premium economy classes. Essentially VS saw it was crazy to expect one Y pax to pay five times as much as another for the same seat just for a bit of flexibility, and introduced their premium economy product.

However anecdotal evidence would suggest that when BA introduced WT+, they crushed the seats in an inch or two at the back to make room for it, and also generate more revenue at the same time by making the more discerning pax pay for that extra bit of comfort.

My point is I wonder just how many folks would be prepared to pay that £20 more for that seat? I know that I would, but I have this nasty feeling that I'm in a very small minority that would even realise.

Cheers, Howard

[Scrooge]

I thought they were putting the seats back in on domestic only?

Anyhow's Fozzyo your right,the only real complaint anyone can have about VS Y is the seat pitch,going by TR's here and on skytrax thats the only complaint,IFE and good food(for Y) is the norm,but if you have legs you can't sit in the seat for 10 hrs [:(]

My hubby is 6'5", and he always has a problem in economy - he gets really bad problems with his knees being wedged at some strange angle against the seat in front (and that's before the person in front reclines!!). Usually this means a week of pain while on holiday and another week after we get back. And in addition he usually gets back problems because the rest of the seat is designed for an average height (but that's life I suppose - you can't cater for everyone). It's become so much of an issue now that if we fly long haul, we feel we have to upgrade.

Of course, we are very lucky that we can afford to do this (it just means we don't go away as often). However, in a world which is going Health & Safety mad (a huge plant pot had to be moved in my office one day because somebody accidentally walked into it for the only time in 5 years!), I find it interesting that it is seen as acceptable for airlines to provide this seat pitch no matter how long your legs are.

Maybe airlines could think about keeping emergency exit seats for tall passengers - even when we've turned up early for flights it's hard to get them, as they've normally already been sold or allocated (usually it seems to someone who is vertically challenged in the other way;))

Or offer a discount off an upgrade for tall people - hard to measure them I guess!! I just wish we felt we had the choice of economy[:(]

Originally posted by jetwet1
I thought they were putting the seats back in on domestic only?

I understand that by end-2005 it applies to transatlantic too. I sympathise with the taller folk; I'm 5'8" and while not lardy I'm not a super model and still find Y seats uncomfortable. But, have been fortunate in recent years, apart from the odd occasion, to be at or nearer the front.

AA did take seats out of their domestic metal but those seats all had a knack of finding their way on to the 757s and A300s:D

Cheers,
VS045

Yeah, I'm 6'2", and as someone noted, my knees also rub up against the seat in front of me. I don't find seat pitch as much as a problem (although more would be great!), but I think legroom is the biggest (or smallest..) problem for VS. If anything, that has to be increased in EC. I laughed yesterday when I heard an advert for VS EC on the radio where they said something along the lines of, "experience Virgin Atlantic economy class, with the best legroom and seat pitch". Yeah right. I definately find BA WT better when it comes to room.

I would say its wrong to offer people such a small amoutn of space, however, after boarding a FCA a320, and sitting down, ti suddenly dawned on me how close the disgusting green plastic seat in front was. Thankfully it was only 2 hours, still... my next trip on VS will make Y seem like heaven!!!!
(though an extra inch or 2 wouldnt go amiss)

Originally posted by sailor99

Originally posted by slinky09
However AA is now reducing it back to 31/32" and fitting more seats.

Shame that their brave move apparantly didn't work out. As you say, that extra couple of inches makes all the difference to us lanky, prehensile types

One problem is because of IATA you cannot really charge more for extra pitch, so no point trying to innovate!

Of course, you could get around that by increasing the 'surcharges' .

Cheers
sky

[Scrooge]

Originally posted by sailor99

Originally posted by slinky09
However AA is now reducing it back to 31/32" and fitting more seats.

Shame that their brave move apparantly didn't work out. As you say, that extra couple of inches makes all the difference to us lanky, prehensile types

funny thing is,one of the two constantly profitable airlines over here offers 32/34 inches of seat pitch..JB..Click here

Having gone across country on Southwest as well,they have better seats than VS,but of course no IFE or food,well they do give you the boxes on the "long haul flight" which are better than the BA "all day deli box"

I do have tucked away in my mind that if you want extra leg room on VS then pay for Premium Economy. And you can have a pop at the exit seats for £50 (although how many people actually know about this would be interesting). So to be fair to VS they do make some provision for the tall. It could be argued that maybe they should make more provision (or less) or that PE is too much of a price premium. But I guess this was not the point I had in mind when putting up the original post.

So to me the question is wether 31/32" is comfortable for an acceptable % of the population, bearing in mind that the majority of their routes are long haul and between the UK/US; countries not know for breeding petit people.

I just had a little measure of myself sitting at my desk here at home. Not exactly a comparable situation to an aircraft seat I know. If I sit with my bum firmly against the seat back, then my knees stick out 26" (if you see what I mean). Add on say 4" for the aircraft seat padding and you get to 30". Which means for me I think I would just about be comfortable BUT ONLY so long as I sit very upright, and so long as the person in front does not recline. Which is indeed my experience - I end up very uncomfortable, with back pain, and bruised knees from having them knocked in the aisle. But I am 6'3". Am I representitive? According to this I am in the top 5% of white men ([8D]). So the seats look like they will make me, and 5% of all white men uncomfortable - Maybe 2% of the total poulation (allowing for women and smaller races). This doesn't seem too bad, in fact it seems pretty reasonable for VS to make me uncomfortable because I am the exception rather than the rule.

But men who are 6' or more represent about 25% of the white men - say 13% or the total poulation. My gut feel is that they too would be uncomfortable, being just 4% smaller than me. To make 13% of the population uncomfortable does not seem like a scandal to me, but it is not particularly impressive. Certainly it is a far cry from a selling point - which is really where I am coming from.

Anyone want a poll? Question something like "Do you think VS seat pitch in Y is a reasonable consumer proposition?"

It also depends on your body structure. for exaple, i am 6ft 1in but have 31" legs, whilst my wife is 5ft 9" but has 33" legs

its wrong that taller people are discriminated against by a system which was based on 1950@s verage heights and weights

I think this is a really interesting topic (being 6'3"). Do you think it would be possible to add to the aircraft or seat databases on this site to add an actual seat pitch in? I know this may sound impractical but think of the use to the tall people. If you knew for instance that seat 62A was a 30" seat where as 45A was a 32" seat this would make a significant difference to the tall people and a huge benefit being able to book with enlightenment. I am not sure how easy it to measure actual seat pitch with say a cloth tape measure but I am sure there must be some mileage in at least trying this.

Paul

I guess we have the technology in the seat ratings currently. The problem is how to get at the data - as a group we could all go round with tape measures We could even sell special VF branded ones on the site[i]), but is that really going to generate a usable database?

[Pete]

Having just booked flights with Thomas Cook to Turkey next year, I was at first worried to hear their average seat pitch is 29" (and their "official" line is that none of their seats are below the CAA minimum of 26" [:0]) - but, they do allow you to book exit row seats in advance for 40 quid return (which is broken down as ten quid to reserve a specific seat, and 30 quid to have an 'extra leg room' seat). True, Turkey is only just over 4 hours flight time, but that stuck me as pretty good value compared to VS's £100 return, and then not even confirmed until you get to the airport and no one else has bagged them.

Pete