BA Starts 787 Long Haul

Back to Forum

This topic contains 61 replies, has 20 voices, and was last updated by  flightdeck 5 Sep 2013
at 17:04
.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 62 total)

  • Anonymous

    Bucksnet
    Participant

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

    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
    Participant

    Hi Alex.

    Do you know why was an airbridge not used?

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


    Bullfrog
    Participant

    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
    Participant

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


    LuganoPirate
    Participant

    Bullfrog.

    +1


    Bucksnet
    Participant

    The next destinations should be EWR and PHL.


    sparkyflyer
    Participant

    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
    Participant

    Economy seat width is the same as the 747.

    +1 sparkyflyer

    Except of course EWR in January. Brrrr!


    Londonian
    Participant

    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.


    sparkyflyer
    Participant

    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
    Participant

    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.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 62 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
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