[Thinking aloud] Re: 77W F seat

[SQFM]

There are of course many complaints about the 77W F seat, such as being far too wide to be comfortable, insufficient recline for relaxing position and uncomfortable when lounging....
There is a cut-out in the foot space of Row 2 seats and also a corresponding cut-out in the head space of Row 1 seats...... Not something that you expect to encounter in F.
As far as I can see, the only reason behind the cut-out is to save 6 inches or so of seat pitch. [I]Given that SQ was clearly on a "bigger is better" mission....

To increase F seat pitch, it would mean to use the whole cabin from door 1 to 2. That also means increasing F seating capacity from 8 to 12. It is obvious SQ wants to maximise the overall seating capacity of premium classes F & J (given J 1-2-1 offering), hence, compromising the exclusivity and comfort of F pax.

I believe JL F products (seats, food & beverages) on 777W long-range flights are more superior than SQ F. It would be interesting to get more reviews for comparison.

Even BA 777-200 with 4 classes configuration has one whole cabin (door 1 to 2) dedicated to F though the seating arrangement are sloping one way and has 14 seating capacity.

Due to the layout of 777 aircraft, it seems airliners are faced with more restrictions on cabin/galley designs than A380 and 747.

Many SQ flyers are passionate on this topic because 744 F will be gone forever and 777W F is here to rule.

[StarG]

They should have done 6 seats in F in 1-1-1 configuration a la CX.

[stargold]

To increase F seat pitch, it would mean to use the whole cabin from door 1 to 2. That also means increasing F seating capacity from 8 to 12. It is obvious SQ wants to maximise the overall seating capacity of premium classes F & J (given J 1-2-1 offering), hence, compromising the exclusivity and comfort of F pax.

As above, both JL and NH have managed to have two rows of F and two rows of C between Door 1 and Door 2 (although in JL's case the toilet was moved to front of Door 1). Since both airlines also have a similar/better pitch as SQ in C, it just comes down to a matter of layout, and I think it would have been better to reduce the toilet size in SQ 77W F and extend F to full pitch...

I believe JL F products (seats, food & beverages) on 777W long-range flights are more superior than SQ F. It would be interesting to get more reviews for comparison.

The seat definitely looks better, and I think the meal concept is also better by being divided into a definite Japanese and Western selection (rather than the mix-mash of cuisines on SQ). Hard to comment on the quality, but it would not surprise me if it was better than SQ.

Even BA 777-200 with 4 classes configuration has one whole cabin (door 1 to 2) dedicated to F though the seating arrangement are sloping one way and has 14 seating capacity.

I guess the problem is whether they really want to fill the entire section with F seats, given that F demand has been falling steadily for a long time now. Also, BA have 4 rows along the window which is actually a tighter absolute pitch than SQ, although obviously it gives a full length bed due to the herringbone layout.

They should have done 6 seats in F in 1-1-1 configuration a la CX.

I do think it's nice to be able to sit in a pair when travelling with a companion, but it also means forgoing the window when sitting in the middle seats so I'm sure many couples end up sitting separately anyway. Maybe, as you say, 6 seats of 1-1-1 is the way to go, provided there is the ability to dine together a la CX, BA, LX etc.

[sutrakhk]

Just got off from the Emirates 777-300ER F in rather short route (BKK-HKG), I was lucky to get the SkySuite on it, it was really nice. However I never flow on the SQ 77W's First Class, I cannot direct compare each product.

But in my observation, EK's 77W provide a better pitch than SQ because the 2 toilets are located between the cockpit and the 1L door, so the suites are started just next to door 1. Still 2 Rows of First and 2 Rows or Business between Door 1 and 2, but it provide sufficient space to make evryone happy.

I think the reasons why SQ put the toilets behild the door 1 are the toilets would be too small between Door 1 and the cockpit and the other problem is due to the curve of the cabin, the front of row 1 would be narrower than row 2.

Here is the pics of the EK cabin:


Notes: The cabin look more spacious than others because EK not only remove the overhead luggage bin, but also the crew bunk!