BA Seating

Back to Forum
Viewing 15 posts - 151 through 165 (of 183 total)

  • esselle
    Participant

    My preference is the 1.5-3.7-2.4 configuration favoured by Imaginary Airlines.

    Everybody gets a column, a window, and an aisle, partially shared with the person next to them, and partially by the person either in front, or behind them, depending which way they are facing.

    Good grief.


    Bullfrog
    Participant

    Bucksnet, I understand your perspective. Whilst I see your claim to 2-4-2, because it is shown, say with ‘more depth’ ie over 1.5 rows, it gives the impression of being 1-2-1.

    Whilst no one has physically experienced this EADS design, I think it looks more inviting and offers more privacy, space and access than the ‘typical’ 2-4-2 configuration.

    I suppose soon, we may want to start measuring ‘surface area of seating area’, for which that can be broken down into ‘surface area when in bed position’ & ‘non body parts surface area’ ie adjacent ledges and storage.


    Bucksnet
    Participant

    Bullfrog, many thanks for understanding my perspective.

    We need to understand that cabin space is a precious commodity, and that seat designers try to cram in as many seats as they can, while still working to a brief, like direct aisle access for every seat.

    The new EADS seat gives the impression of 1-2-1 as you correctly say, and if you sit in one and look left and right you will only see a maximum of 3 other passengers. That’s the idea of the staggering.

    However we need to realise that the seat is not just the upright bit we sit in but an oblong unit, and on one side of our seat will be half of the next one. If you assign a letter to each vertical line of seats you will have 8 different letters on the seat plan, so 8 across.


    esselle
    Participant

    What absolute twaddle.


    Bullfrog
    Participant

    It may be 8 abreast seating to some, but over the equivalent depth of 1.5 rows it does create more space. It would be my preference over the forward / backward arrangement offered by BA Club which feels more cramped and claustrophobic.


    millionsofmiles
    Participant

    In the article it says 1-2-1, clearly and literally.
    I have no idea how one can make that an 8 abreast config, also, if you look at the illustration/photo.

    http://www.ausbt.com.au/airbus-fully-flat-beds-lie-flat-seats-in-a350-xwb-business-class
    from the article:

    “The Solstys is the business class seat you’ll see on Etihad’s flights to and from Australia, and is a similar kind of layout to Emirates’ A380 business class, in a staggered 1-2-1 configuration.”
    Sorry BA, but 8 across, bidirectional, just can’t compete.


    Bucksnet
    Participant

    It says staggered 1-2-1 which gives you 2-4-2 but agreed it is better than BA.


    STORMIN'
    Participant

    I have been a loyal BA customer for 30 years and have retained Gold status year on year, since the current Tier system started over 20 years ago. I am also LH Senator and Air France / KLM Platinum Elite Plus for life, amongst others and I therefore feel that I am in a position to draw reasonable comparisons.

    Regrettably, with experience of carriers other than BA, I really have to question why I continue to support this airline. The CW and F products are now very tired, both in concept and appearance, whilst I really don’t understand what all the excitement is about with “New” First – electric window blinds?! I’ve recently flown “Old” and “New” First. “Old” First was generally filthy and worn whilst “New” First was cluttered in the B747s with no feeling of any real improvement on “Old” First other than the fact that it was less filthy and worn. The catering standard in First has declined beyond all recognition with food choices having run out on two of the flights last done.

    There is much talk about the superiority of Mid-East / Far East carrier’s First and Business products. However, you don’t have to look that far afield to find a quality premium product as I found recently when I flew out of LCY via FRA to MEX on LH. Business Class on their Emb-190s has the next seat unsold, unlike BA, and offers superior in-flight catering. Transferring onto First Class at FRA provides a car upon arrival at the bottom of the steps which takes you directly to the LH First Lounge that knocks spots of the BA T5 Lounge, particularly now that it has been down-graded. First Class on the immaculate LH B747-400 (as distinct from their B747-8i) is upstairs and comprises a self-contained unit with a proper bed and a separate seat. Catering is what you would expect of a quality airline in First Class. Upon arrival at MEX, I was met off the aircraft and escorted through the Diplomatic Channel at Immigration thereby saving me well over an hour in the congested queues there. This is First Class as it should be.

    For such a superior product, you would think there would be a substantial price differential. There was – I priced the trip with BA before booking for comparison – LH was much cheaper.

    BA needs to think long and hard about its current and future First product because calling it First is a misrepresentation. Perhaps rebranding this as Club World Plus might be a better representation – or better still, come to terms with the fact that BA clearly no longer has the appetite for offering a proper First and scrap it, focusing instead upon investment in providing a world-beating Business Class


    millionsofmiles
    Participant

    @ bucksnet

    So for you 1-2-1 is the same as 2-4-2.
    Then if you add half of th ten little dwarves (minus a third of the temperature on Christmas Eve) that gives 14.
    14 in a row…so a much inferior product to BA right?

    You are even better than VK in inventing pro.BA arguments.


    IanFromHKG
    Participant

    Let’s just agree to disagree on the staggered-1-2-1 vs. 8-across, can we? For what it’s worth I think Bucksnet’s views are well-explained and understandable. I also entirely see why some people argue that EK is 1-2-1, and have pointed out before that if BA gave different row numbers to their forward-facing and backward-facing seats (on the basis that row numbers should refer to where peoples’ shoulders are, which equates to EK’s approach if you think about it), then they could argue that they have an alternating 1-1-1-1 / 1-2-1 configuration. Ultimately, so what?

    The reality is that many airlines are moving to a configuration where one person’s seat will partially overlap with their neighbour’s. You could say the same of CX’s new seat, and I haven’t heard anyone try to argue that that is anything other than 1-2-1, but the reality is each seat overlaps with the seats in front and behind.

    So really, we are getting bogged down in semantics, and seeing a teensy bit of antagonism along the way – and I hope we all want to avoid that happening again now that so much of the vitriol has disappeared from the forum. Let’s agree to disagree, and move on. Please.


    Bucksnet
    Participant

    Thanks Ian.

    @millionsofmiles

    This is 1-2-1: –

    http://www.airliners.net/photo/Singapore-Airlines/Boeing-777-312-ER/1222154/L/&sid=644cc4a7128c6937acfdc2ff2ec72fee

    The seat plan for the above aircraft confirms only 4 columns of seats – A, D, F and K. For me 1-2-1 does not mean 2-4-2 but staggered 1-2-1, where the next column of seats is half a length offset, does.

    A certain airline that uses the same layout as the new EADS seat, not the same seat but very similar, has a seat plan with columns A, B, D, E, F, G, J and K. I count 8, I don’t know how you count, but I’ve got 8.

    The CX seat is basically 1-2-1, but space is saved by angling the seats in what’s called a reverse herringbone layout. The seat plan confirms 4 columns – A, D, G, and K. It should be noted that BA squeeze in 56 seats in the same space where CX have 45, so more seats to sell. However I know what seat I prefer, and would be prepared to pay more, so CX should get a higher yield.


    SimonS1
    Participant

    Ian_from_HKG – 27/06/2013 02:46 GMT
    “if BA gave different row numbers to their forward-facing and backward-facing seats (on the basis that row numbers should refer to where peoples’ shoulders are, which equates to EK’s approach if you think about it), then they could argue that they have an alternating 1-1-1-1 / 1-2-1 configuration.”

    How would that work then, because on BA if you are in the window or middle seats you have to climb over someone else to get out. There is nothing private or 1-2-1 about that.


    IanFromHKG
    Participant

    I was looking more at seat width and different numbering conventions, Simon, and trying to demonstrate that the mere fact that airlines choose to number their seats in a particular way shouldn’t be determinative of how the configuration works in practice. It’s moot, though, since BA don’t make this claim


    esselle
    Participant

    My comments are based purely on what I have actually experienced, rather than what I have assumed based on Internet research.

    Having flown extensively on Emirates, Swiss, Etihad and Finnair versions of the staggered layout, it would never have occurred to me to think of these as 8 across.

    And it still does not.


    SimonS1
    Participant

    Indeed Ian, I agree it’s how it works in practice that is key. That’s why in my experience it is best to have actually used the service before offering opinions.

    It may be the same number of seats in the same physical space but that is where a good designer can make a difference. The staggered 1-2-1 works well on that brief as every seat has direct access to the aisle compared to 2-4-2 where you have to climb over someone else.

    Coming back to the original topic it seems that most people agree the BA layout is now outdated and therefore surprising they didn’t come up with something innovative for the A380.

Viewing 15 posts - 151 through 165 (of 183 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Business Traveller March 2024 edition
Business Traveller March 2024 edition
Be up-to-date
Magazine Subscription
To see our latest subscription offers for Business Traveller editions worldwide, click on the Subscribe & Save link below
Polls