This is the main V-Flyer Forum for general discussion of everything related to flying with Virgin-branded travel companies.
#881019 by MrDoob
23 Aug 2014, 19:47
Just for a change I was looking at BA for my next NYC trip in December. Although I travel a reasonable amount, it is rarely at the front on the plane unless I am upgrading myself with miles. My Virgin AU status will have expired by December and I have to conclude that's it’s unlikely I will make AU again, especially now VS have dropped the Sydney flight, and I'm not sure I can be bothered to chase the tier points anymore. Mounting European travel means I really ought to try a stint of BA loyalty. Sadly though my best intentions fell by the wayside as alas I was subdued by the temptation and snagged a seat in First to JFK with BA Avios. So that gets me no closer to moving off Executive Club Blue, but will be "interesting" and on a good old 747.... amd compare the Club House to the Concorde Room... but anyway to get back on topic...

So before I fell into temptation, there I was happily picking nice new(ish)787 flights to EWR on BA in Economy, but then I read the reviews... xx( Nine across is tight, and I think we are all going to miss the a340s and a330s with their spacious 8 across when they are gone. Hopefully upper will be an improvement over the disastrous UCDS in the a330s, but in the rest of the plane I have a nasty suspicion the 787 will be one to avoid :? Airline economics alas means tighter cabins, and I'm just not sure bigger windows and plastic wings makes up for losing the feeling in your arms! I really do hope I'm proved wrong in this :(
#881143 by MrDoob
25 Aug 2014, 17:46
Yes. So we are talking about an extra seat (in the 787) in 19cm of extra width compared with the 330/340. My bum is bigger than that ii)
#881385 by MrPie
29 Aug 2014, 08:47
Fuzzy14 wrote:Thomas Cook fit 3-3-3 in economy in a A330, Virgin are positively generous with the 2-4-2 arrangement.

Sadly 3-3-3 is the norm for economy these days and the 787 was designed with this in mind.


actually no. Boeing's recommended configuration is 2-4-2. So far only ANA and JAL use this config.
3-3-3 is the high density configuration which the other carriers use....and positively sucks.
#881457 by VS075
30 Aug 2014, 10:44
Fuzzy14 wrote:Thomas Cook fit 3-3-3 in economy in a A330, Virgin are positively generous with the 2-4-2 arrangement.

Sadly 3-3-3 is the norm for economy these days and the 787 was designed with this in mind.


At least one Thomas Cook A330 (G-CHTZ) is 2-4-2 and I believe they will all be refurbished soon to the same standard.
#881568 by Leisure Flyer
31 Aug 2014, 11:47
Having flown with Norwegian LGW-LAX on the 787 I have to agree. While the width is perfectly acceptable for a low cost carrier like DY (and a lot better than 8 abreast 767/9 abreast A330) I would be very disappointed with it on BA/VS. The seat itself is only a little narrower than one on a 747 but the big difference is the seats are much closer together, and the arm rests are narrower. The narrow aisles also made it harder that it should be for me (tall and skinny) to walk down normally without brushing past elbows/feet.

There are rumours BA are going to improve their economy cabin when they get their 787-9's as a result of bad feedback on the '8's'. I've heard ones suggesting narrower aisles and slightly wider seats (partially solves half the problem) or going 8 abreast (solves both problems but it would be a bold move).
Virgin Atlantic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: David1946, Google [Bot] and 159 guests

Itinerary Calendar