[Anonymous]

[Bucksnet]

BA has started 787 flights to Toronto already. I thought the training flights to ARN would take longer?

[NameRemoved-18/12/14]

Hello Bucksnet

I was on the last training flight yesterday from LHR. CC confirmed that Toronto would begin today.

A photo I took of passengers boarding for the flight back to London:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ghasbmtdad88cb6/2013-08-31%2017.43.43.jpg

[Bucksnet]

Hi Alex.

Do you know why was an airbridge not used?

[NameRemoved-18/12/14]

I have no idea. It was one of those silly bus transfers when it would have been quicker walking!

[Bullfrog]

I much prefer boarding by stairs, especially the Queen of the Skies, the 747. Gives a real impression of the awesome phenomenon of air travel which most people take for granted.

[Bucksnet]

Indeed. Not so nice if it’s cold or raining, or both.

[LuganoPirate]

Bullfrog.

+1

[Bucksnet]

The next destinations should be EWR and PHL.

[sparkyflier]

EWR is next and that is confirmed. After that we shall see, although PHL does seem a reasonable guess.

According to Alexpo J is great, and WTP seems atractive, but Y does look really, really tight indeed.

Re silly bus transfers, they can be a real pain and a walk across a tarmac adds to the travel adventure aspect, especially if its in baking sunlight and somewhere like Africa!

[Bucksnet]

Economy seat width is the same as the 747.

[NameRemoved-18/12/14]

+1 sparkyflyer

Except of course EWR in January. Brrrr!

[Londonian]

I also tried out the 787 in a CW seat on the hop to ARN and found all aspects of the new aircraft to be great. It is not a game changer but the new features are clear improvements, especially the larger windows and electronic blinds. Even on a day return flight to Sweden (over four hours in the air) the fresher air in the cabin and the lower pressurisation meant I stepped off the plane – after a few small bottles of Pommery and some red wine- feeling better than normal. The WTP cabin definitely looks a winner for day flights.

[sparkyflier]

Bucksnett: This came up somewhere on this forum a few weeks ago, and it was proved that the seats are narrower on the 787 than the 747.

The poster cited I think it was seatguru which is not always accurate. You can see from the pics that it is much tighter and a friend of mine who has been on a 787 9 across felt a huge difference. Even rfurguson, regular poster here, has noticed that the seats are much narrower!

The aircraft was designed to be an 8 across in Y aircraft, as this is hugely popular, but airlines have decided to bring in an extra seat, much like some did with the 777 which was designed to be a 9 across aircraft, but AF & EK for example went for 10 across, which in my experience, is dreadful.

[Bucksnet]

Seat Guru says 17.5 inch width on all of BA’s long haul aircraft, which is clearly wrong and they need to correct it.

The 787 was designed for 9 across, but Boeing ‘recommends’ 8 across. The A330 is 8 across and the 787 internal cabin width is 15 inches wider.

BA have as far as I know gone for the standard 17.3 inch seat width, but QR for example have only gone for 16.9 inches. If BA have gone for narrower seats, it must be to save weight.

It’s strange that economy passengers on a domestic flight will get 18-19 inches of seat width but on the 787 only 17 or so, and the 787 could be doing 15 hour flights.

[Author]

Posts