Should SQ switch to 3-4-3 on its 77W for Economy?

[zilchster]

Given that CX has finally caved in and switched to the dreaded 3-4-3 layout on its 77W in economy, do you think SQ should adopt the same?

Will you still fly SQ if they switch a 3-4-3 on Y?

[yflyer]

Given that CX has finally caved in and switched to the dreaded 3-4-3 layout on its 77W in economy, do you think SQ should adopt the same?

No!

Will you still fly SQ if they switch a 3-4-3 on Y?

NOOOOOOO!!!!

[SQ228]

This is the number one point I make to friends tossing up between EK and SQ. This is what fundamentally sets them apart from the rest for Australians flying in Y. Given they're still refitting with a 3-3-3 layout across all 777s that they're doing cabin work on, I think we're safe...

[SQfanatic]

Given that CX has finally caved in and switched to the dreaded 3-4-3 layout on its 77W in economy, do you think SQ should adopt the same?

Will you still fly SQ if they switch a 3-4-3 on Y?

Where did you hear about CX doing this? And what made you ask this?

And for SQ switching to 3-4-3, HELL NO TO THE NO NO NOOOOOOO!!! (Source: Bishop Bullwinkle on YouTube/memes)

[9V-JKL]

Where did you hear about CX doing this? And what made you ask this?

http://www.sqtalk.com/forum/showthre...459#post205459

[alian]

Given that CX has finally caved in and switched to the dreaded 3-4-3 layout on its 77W in economy, do you think SQ should adopt the same?

Will you still fly SQ if they switch a 3-4-3 on Y?

Big yes if you are a share holder. Hell no if you are a passenger.

The problem is most passengers don't know the difference and it's not advertised so they look at price only so really it hard for airlines to earn appreciation of price seekers

I've previously had a thread on justifying y space. http://www.sqtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15407

[wlgspotter]

Big yes if you are a share holder. Hell no if you are a passenger.

The problem is most passengers don't know the difference and it's not advertised so they look at price only so really it hard for airlines to earn appreciation of price seekers

I've previously had a thread on justifying y space. http://www.sqtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15407

Yes, adding my voice to the big NO NO for SQ to go down the 3-4-3 path on their 77Ws (or any variant of their 777 for that matter...)

But, again, as @alian said, most (other) passengers don't know the difference between a 9-abreast vs 10-abreast on 777. Case in point - I have family members, who, over the past 2-3 years, have flown on NZ's B77Ws to USA. As you might know NZ is one of the airlines to employ 3-4-3 on their 777s - first their 77Ws, now their 77Es as well. Family even said it was nice and spacious....It may be a perception thing, but in general I do think a lot of paseengers/customers doesn't know the difference... I even know of people commenting it is more comfortable to fly in Y class on EK compared to SQ!...

[Mikana]

Yes, adding my voice to the big NO NO for SQ to go down the 3-4-3 path on their 77Ws (or any variant of their 777 for that matter...)

But, again, as @alian said, most (other) passengers don't know the difference between a 9-abreast vs 10-abreast on 777. Case in point - I have family members, who, over the past 2-3 years, have flown on NZ's B77Ws to USA. As you might know NZ is one of the airlines to employ 3-4-3 on their 777s - first their 77Ws, now their 77Es as well. Family even said it was nice and spacious....It may be a perception thing, but in general I do think a lot of paseengers/customers doesn't know the difference... I even know of people commenting it is more comfortable to fly in Y class on EK compared to SQ!...

That's exactly the problem. The vast majority of people only fly mid- and long-haul once or twice a year or less, and when they do, it's all about price. Oh, they might gripe about being packed in, sore backs, etc., but they rationalise it away as cheap, or something they only do occasionally and after all, it's only for a few hours and then it's over. It's how I manage every time I have to fly coach, which, let's face it, is NEVER anything less than punishment.

[SQfanatic]

That's exactly the problem. The vast majority of people only fly mid- and long-haul once or twice a year or less, and when they do, it's all about price. Oh, they might gripe about being packed in, sore backs, etc., but they rationalise it away as cheap, or something they only do occasionally and after all, it's only for a few hours and then it's over. It's how I manage every time I have to fly coach, which, let's face it, is NEVER anything less than punishment.

I have flown EK's 77W back in 2011 with a 3-4-3 layout. My parents and I hated it. However, I did fly EK's 773 (non ER) from DXB to MAA in December 2014 and it didn't bother my parents for a short flight as none of us got up and walked around the cabin (We slept through that flight anyway).

Very uncomfortable to walk in 1 aisle without almost touching someone, especially uncomfortable during a long haul flight (Given DXB-SFO-DXB is about 16 hours each way as it is a polar flight). SQ's 3-3-3 on a 77W or any 777 is still better and spacious to me IMHO. What I'm dreading and worried is that my mom's flying the A359 while going nonstop from SFO-SIN this December and this flight is almost 18 hours, how cramped will the aisles be?

I think I know why CX is doing this....This is in response to the fact they are retiring all their 744's and testing out their new seats as they will no longer have 744's with that configuration, and also demand on long haul routes with the 77W. Hence, why they are testing the Recaro seats so they can refit their 77W fleet with these seats with that configuration as the current seats may not work out.

If SQ would have to do this to their 777's (Especially 77W), they would have to refit every single plane with new, and yet different, smaller seats like Recaro, or worse as their current seats look to support 3-3-3 better. It surprises me that CX is not doing anything with their other 777's (772 and 773 even though some are refitted too). Honestly, I am against airlines having a 3-4-3 77W. I cannot imagine the pain my family friends would endure if they flew CX's 77W when they become 10 abreast. However, I believe and still am optimistic that SQ will retain the 3-3-3 config on all 777's regardless. Besides, they have A380's of 10-abreast so I think with the demand, SQ will probably not change 777's (and 77W) to 10 abreast.

[CarbonMan]

A 3-4-3 configuration for red-eyes and flights longer than 4-5 hours is a definite no-no for me. Unless I have no choice.

If I were a tad younger, I may endure it for cost savings so that I can make it up on accommodation and food. Now, I'm not as slim and I don't wish to die of DVT just yet.

[SQfanatic]

A 3-4-3 configuration for red-eyes and flights longer than 4-5 hours is a definite no-no for me. Unless I have no choice.

If I were a tad younger, I may endure it for cost savings so that I can make it up on accommodation and food. Now, I'm not as slim and I don't wish to die of DVT just yet.

There you go! One of the reasons I am looking for...The DVT thing. I have to agree with you on that. Exactly what my mom is super worried about, as at times some varicose veins have showed up at times. This is exactly why she's dreading flying 18 hours nonstop. I know SQ will do an excellent job with service (no problem), but even then that's my mom's opinion from taking EK 4 times (Yes she went on a 77L and a 77W on her own in Feb of 2009/2012).

I am only in my 20's but longterm going thru that I don't know what to say. Let's hope as long as I am KF and bother to earn enough miles (as well as my parents), perhaps better off that I fly a premium class with enough miles put aside. That's what I will do if I become less stubborn and want to ever fly the A359 (Honestly irrespective of what anyone says, I love Boeing planes for travel especially longhaul, the 77W).

[alian]

Maybe IATA should make mandatory to advertise seat dimensions and governments should mandate the maximum permissible size per person per seat.

Oh wait I'm dreaming .... this will never happen when $$$ is involved.

Throwing a spanner into things ... which airline is gonna to be first to 10 abreast a350??? The B787 was designed for 8 abreast but now besides JAL (and a few ANA) all are 9 abreast. So my point on 10 across a350 is gonna be when not if.

[Metropolitan Airlines]

Given that CX has finally caved in and switched to the dreaded 3-4-3 layout on its 77W in economy, do you think SQ should adopt the same?

In no circumstances should they switch to 3-4-3 layout on B777.

Will you still fly SQ if they switch a 3-4-3 on Y?

I will be flying QF if they switch to 3-4-3 on Y.

Maybe IATA should make mandatory to advertise seat dimensions and governments should mandate the maximum permissible size per person per seat.

I think IATA should make a mandatory standard that each Economy class seat should be at least 20 inches wide with a minimum 35 inches seat pitch for customers comfort and safety.

[9V-SIA]

Kudos to SQ if they stick to 3-3-3.

But the 778s or 779s, if they order them, will be 3-4-3 for sure

[loldude333]

Kudos to SQ if they stick to 3-3-3.

But the 778s or 779s, if they order them, will be 3-4-3 for sure

778s and 779s have been designed for 3-4-3 though. Not quite as wide as A380 or B747 but definitely better than 3-4-3 in the current 777s.