LGW refits

[buns]

HL

It of course is all in the wording :w

One would hope that in the future the VH "Allocation" is not the entire front section that has hitherto been the case - else, as you rightly point out, there will be tears before bedtime

buns

Well given that they had exclusive access to the front half of the bubble I would expect not otherwise I can foresee WW3 breaking out! :0

HL - I've got my enlisting papers ready to fill in

Buns - Let's common sense does prevail, otherwise there will be alot of tears.

On the other hand, how will 'we' know. VH customers don't have to wear a badge but I guess it'll be the ones looking very smug ):

I can't see what all the fuss is about. It isn't that special up there. Isn't it important that you receive the service you pay for?

Virgin have HAD to split the upper deck in order to comply with the strict disability acts that have come in, in America and the UK.

And as for tears?? Hmmmm......

[Neil]

I can't see what all the fuss is about. It isn't that special up there. Isn't it important that you receive the service you pay for?

Virgin have HAD to split the upper deck in order to comply with the strict disability acts that have come in, in America and the UK.

And as for tears?? Hmmmm......

I don't understand the disability point you make. Yes, Virgin have to offer all classes on the main deck, but they do that anyway on the current LGW config. Are you saying the law makes them have economy upstairs because I just don't get that. Cold you clarify what the law says that makes Virgin have a split upstairs cabin?

To answer your other point, without doubt, the best flying/cabin experience outside of UC is the current PE bubble on the LGW fleet. The space you get is so much better compared to say than any other PE cabin on the VS fleet, add in the small amount of pax and a very good pax/crew ratio, you do forget you have 400 other pax below you, so it is a shame it is changing.

Unfortunately there isn't anything anyone can do about it, so we have to move on, it is just a shame as whatever VS do, it won't give the same experience that you currently get.

My point about the disability act is the percentage of seats per cabin offered with moveable arm rests. Hence the improved superseat now offered on the A330. The act only applies to new and refitted aircraft. So the current config of LGW aircraft does not comply with this act and because Virgin are refitting the aircraft the number of Premium seats offered with moveable arm rests for wheelchair users has to increase. You may not be aware that passengers that use wheelchairs are not allowed on the upper deck. It has nothing to do with Y going on the upper deck. Virgin are increasing the number of W seats to 66 and reducing the number of Y slightly. I guess the demand for Premium has gone up for leisure passenger in the past couple of years but only by a small percentage otherwise they would have kept the bubble and increased the number of seats downstairs also.

I agree that we need to get over it. There is nothing we can do about it.

My point about the disability act is the percentage of seats per cabin offered with moveable arm rests. Hence the improved superseat now offered on the A330. The act only applies to new and refitted aircraft. So the current config of LGW aircraft does not comply with this act and because Virgin are refitting the aircraft the number of Premium seats offered with moveable arm rests for wheelchair users has to increase. You may not be aware that passengers that use wheelchairs are not allowed on the upper deck. It has nothing to do with Y going on the upper deck. Virgin are increasing the number of W seats to 66 and reducing the number of Y slightly. I guess the demand for Premium has gone up for leisure passenger in the past couple of years but only by a small percentage otherwise they would have kept the bubble and increased the number of seats downstairs also.

I agree that we need to get over it. There is nothing we can do about it.

With all due respects, the refit resulting in a split upper deck configuration of PE & Economy seating on LGW/MAN planes has absolutely nothing to do with the Disability Act.

Yes many of the planes operating out of LGW do not have the removable armrests you refer to but VS are very clear on their website under the 'Disability Seating' seation which planes are fitted currently with fixed armrests. They provide a Special Assistance team who will help and advise any passengers needing specific seating.

Obviously, the upper deck configuation would not be suitable for pysically challenged people, so the refit explanation using the Disability Act is irrelevant.

Agree there is nothing we can do about the changes but people will always have strong opinions on this refit configuration just as they do when discussing the LHR config of UC & Econ on the upper deck.

[Neil]

My point about the disability act is the percentage of seats per cabin offered with moveable arm rests. Hence the improved superseat now offered on the A330. The act only applies to new and refitted aircraft. So the current config of LGW aircraft does not comply with this act and because Virgin are refitting the aircraft the number of Premium seats offered with moveable arm rests for wheelchair users has to increase. You may not be aware that passengers that use wheelchairs are not allowed on the upper deck. It has nothing to do with Y going on the upper deck. Virgin are increasing the number of W seats to 66 and reducing the number of Y slightly. I guess the demand for Premium has gone up for leisure passenger in the past couple of years but only by a small percentage otherwise they would have kept the bubble and increased the number of seats downstairs also.

I agree that we need to get over it. There is nothing we can do about it.

Okay..... So from what ou have said the disability act has no impact on why Virgin have decided to change the config. They could have increased W downstairs (while refitting the new seats/IFE across the a/c) and still leave the bubble all W.

I have no issue with VS deciding to change the config, it's their a/c and they can do what they want, but it purely a commercial decision, not one forced upon them like you suggested.

Like I said the act only applies to new and newly refitted aircraft. The seats on the current config do not comply with the act and if virgin were to leave the fleet as is the act would not apply. Hence the a330 new W seats and the fact that the a340-600 will remain the same. It has a lot to do with it.

[Neil]

No, I agree they can install new seats, but there is no need to change the layout! If they wanted to they could leave all W upstairs, still increase W downstairs and by installing new sets across the a/c fully comply to the act, unless of course you can point to me where it states it must be a 2 class config upstairs?

... unless of course you can point to me where it states it must be a 2 class config upstairs?

And if 2 classes why not all 3 ??

Virgin have HAD to split the upper deck in order to comply with the strict disability acts that have come in, in America and the UK.

Bringing the discussion back to your original comment. Where is this written into the Disability Acts??? You use the word 'HAD' in capitals, so do you have information to clarify that strong statement or perhaps the whole parargraph as above should be edited out of your post ?|

as far as I know the DDA and ADA don't specify such things as cabin classes on different decks. What they do say is things like 'equal access to services' and how that is met is down to the airline.

So an airline can't have all its X class seats upstairs as that would not mean equal access as it prevents a group of people being able to book that class.

UNLESS there is flat access to the cabin so say if an airline has all its X class seats on the A380 only on the top deck it will be compliant because the top deck is accessible directly from the gate area - which is not the case on a 747 for example.

As long as the airline offeres SOME X class seats (with the same attendant services such as meals etc) downstairs then it is in compliance.

VS couldn't have the UC bar on the upper deck as that would not allow equal access to UC disabled pax on the main deck.

If there is a requirement for a disabled access toilet then as long as there is (at least) one avaialable on the main deck then the requirements are met. There is no requirement for a disabled access toilet in each cabin but if an airline wanted to do that that would be a decision for them.

So split classes on the upper deck is NOT a legal requirement at all it is 100% down to the airline.

I didn't say the act means the airline has to place a selection of cabins on the upper deck. They have to have a percentage of seats available to disabled passengers on the main deck and as Virgin have only increased the number of W seats by 8 they have had to split the seats between the cabins to comply with the percentage of seats (50%) that have to have moveable armrests and be accesable on the main deck. As virgin do not have 84 seats in W they have had to place over 50% on the main deck to comply with the act. Hence the plot upper deck.

[Neil]

So, as I've said a few times now, VS could have kept an all W upper deck, increased the lower deck like they are already doing and still easily complied with the rules. You said Virgin HAD to split the upper deck, that just isn't true.

Again just to clarify, I'm not slating Virgin for choosing to make the change, just pointing out it was a choice by them, not a decision that they had to make.

Without wishing to sound unPC, 50% seems to be a ridulous figure and not representative surely of the able to disabled body percentage. Whilst I fully support disabled rights this seems like overkill. As for the bubble argument, I agree it devalues to PE product, but being 6'6" I have to fly UC for legroom and comfort, but if I couldn't pay the UC price I would now just book a exit leg room seat in economy as for me the USP of PE Was the upper deck private cabin

I didn't say the act means the airline has to place a selection of cabins on the upper deck. They have to have a percentage of seats available to disabled passengers on the main deck and as Virgin have only increased the number of W seats by 8 they have had to split the seats between the cabins to comply with the percentage of seats (50%) that have to have moveable armrests and be accesable on the main deck. As virgin do not have 84 seats in W they have had to place over 50% on the main deck to comply with the act. Hence the plot upper deck.

Do you have a source for this 50% figure?

I didn't say the act means the airline has to place a selection of cabins on the upper deck. They have to have a percentage of seats available to disabled passengers on the main deck and as Virgin have only increased the number of W seats by 8 they have had to split the seats between the cabins to comply with the percentage of seats (50%) that have to have moveable armrests and be accesable on the main deck. As virgin do not have 84 seats in W they have had to place over 50% on the main deck to comply with the act. Hence the plot upper deck.

If there was a 'smilie' to cover confusion then I'd be using loads of them. I am finding your replies more and more complicated.
What the heck does "Hence the plot upper deck" actually mean?????

Your original post had referred to the Disability Act and I think you are still trying to convince everyone that the upper deck split configuration has something to do with Virgin Atlantic's compliance to this Act. However it has been pointed out several times very clearly, I thought, that the upper deck change is purely a decision VS made and has absolutely nothing to do with 8 or 84 PE seats or 50% of whatever.

For interest, I looked at a seat plan for BA and on their 747 they have indicated that all aisle seats in the whole of economy have removable arms, they do not mention the PE cabin though!! I also believe AA show which seats have removable arm rests too but like I pointed out earlier VS have a special dedicated team to assist and advise on travelling for a physically challenged person. I am sure VS operate within the boundaries set by ever changing Disability Acts - they dare not

Hmm - Had a dig on google and found this

http://www.ukaccs.info/accesstoairtravelfordisabled.pdf

which is a code of practice. Relevant paragraph is this:-

6.5 Moveable armrests should be located appropriately, in order to facilitate non-ambulant passengers gaining access to seats.
6.6 Moveable armrests are essential to allow the transfer of non-ambulant passengers from a wheelchair to their seat in a dignified manner and to minimise manual lifting. ECAC guidance recommends that at least 50% of all aisle seats should have moveable armrests in aircraft with 30 or more seats. There may be less need to provide lifting armrests in cabins where the seat spacing allows for ease of movement in front of the seats. Moveable armrests will also be required on middle seats where disabled persons or persons with reduced mobility are seated in window seats. The design of new aircraft should also give consideration to facilitating the use of lifting aids, such as hoists.

However - I can see no explicit requirement for 50% per class (indeed requirement is deemed met if there is sufficient leg room etc.)
Like all of these things though to be certain of compliance without testing in court........

Ignoring whether there is a 50% requirement or not...

If I understand you, you are saying that by having 42W upstairs, VS would have had to put 42 W downstairs to meet the 50% requirement. The cabin downstairs is very much 46W + 1 toilet. Therefore to meet the 50% test, the plane would have to have 88W seats.

Now that seats a lot even for a VS plane. You can scale them back by loosing 1 downstairs for every 1 upstairs but realistically, you have to loose half a cabin somewhere - can't do it downstairs so have to loose it upstairs rsulting in the current 66W config.

I can see why they've done it this way, W upstairs means that they have too many W on the plane. You could scale back the W to just 20 downstairs but then thats a net reduction and the small Y cabin back!

Once again there is NO requirement for an airline to have a certain number of seats per cabin on a deck.

There is a recognition that disabled pax should have access to all cabins but again that does not state a particular number of seats should be on a particular deck. VS could have say 100 PE seats on the top deck and 10 on the main deck and they would more than likely comply with the law - a disabled pax is still able to fly in comfort in PE.

The regulations (as megawatt has stated) simply specify 'at least 50% of aisle seats should have moveable armrests' that is not the same as 50% of all seats or all seats in a particular cabin or on a particular deck

The seats on the upper deck don't have moveable armrests

VS could have say 100 PE seats on the top deck and 10 on the main deck

That would be .... sardine-ish :0 .

Is that the new seats?

It would be nice to think that at any moment VA are going to release a press announcement with lots of photos of the refit. All the excitement is getting to me now and with a flight in seven days to MCO just want to know what plane we will be on! Can't wait!!

by Ampthillhatter » 22 May 2012, 06:54

Is that the new seats?

It would be nice to think that at any moment VA are going to release a press announcement with lots of photos of the refit. All the excitement is getting to me now and with a flight in seven days to MCO just want to know what plane we will be on! Can't wait!!

It says on the Virgin website that the new PE seats will be available on LHR flights and Gatwick to Barbados.

by Ampthillhatter » 22 May 2012, 06:54

Is that the new seats?

It would be nice to think that at any moment VA are going to release a press announcement with lots of photos of the refit. All the excitement is getting to me now and with a flight in seven days to MCO just want to know what plane we will be on! Can't wait!!

It says on the Virgin website that the new PE seats will be available on LHR flights and Gatwick to Barbados.

The VS web site often has a loose grasp of reality. It is still insisting that the new PE seat is available on LHR flights and will shortly be rolled out to other services. Updated march 2012.

Clearly the two new A330's with the new PE seat that entered service April last year have not yet been noticed. :w