BA LHR to Canada

richardw

bagand96 wrote: »

Everyone loves to bash BA.

Bottom line is that economy over the Atlantic is much of a muchness. You'll get a seat, a personal TV with a decent amount of films, a meal, a snack, and free drinks. It won't be the most comfortable seat in the sky with the most room but that's economy travel I'm afraid.

Stop worrying it'll be fine. You might even like it (I've heard good things about the 787).

Have you been on a 3-3-3 B787?

photome

richardw wrote: »

I've experienced 3-3-3 on a B787 and yes it's horrible, change to a different aircraft or go PE if you can.

Is it horrible as in all economy is horrible? if not what makes it worse than any of their other aircraft

bagand96

richardw wrote: »

Have you been on a 3-3-3 B787?

No I haven't. What exactly is so awful about it?

richardw

Window seats are closer to the fuselage so the passenger has less elbow and shoulder room impacting on the passenger next to them.

Armrests are also narrower. Generally each passenger is nearer to the next passenger and this has an impact on personal space and comfort. Aisles are narrower so arms and legs using aisle space get hit by people and carts passing them.

A flight on a VS A330 in economy is more comfortable.

bagand96

richardw wrote: »

Window seats are closer to the fuselage so the passenger has less elbow and shoulder room impacting on the passenger next to them.

Armrests are also narrower. Generally each passenger is nearer to the next passenger and this has an impact on personal space and comfort. Aisles are narrower so arms and legs using aisle space get hit by people and carts passing them.

A flight on a VS A330 in economy is more comfortable.

Interesting. Sounds like a 10 abreast 777 then! But Emirates get consistently better reviews than BA, even though BA operate 9 abreast 777s. (off topic yes, but leads back to my point about people loving to bash BA)

Interestingly the 777 cabin is a whole 30cm wider than the 787, which I guess puts into perspective your points when both are operated in 9 abreast layout. That said most airlines have gone for 9 abreast on the 787 (not sounding so 'dreamy' now!)

Back to the OP's question, I wouldn't be changing my holiday over it!

wondercollie

I just ask to be seated across the aisle from my husband, that way we each get an aisle seat.


Air Canada's staff are usually horrible (I'm Canadian and am often forced to fly them domestically). Air Transat is good. Gone with them to Germany. I'd ;pick them before AC

Tiggy_Wiggy

Thanks everyone for your comments. I do appreciate we are travelling economy and shouldn't really expect much.


When reading reviews on most things you generally get a mixture of both positive and negative of experiences. However, although I didn't read them all, as I scrolled down the reviews, there wasn't one positive that I saw. And this is what concerned me.


We are going to look at the cost of moving up to PE, failing that we'll try and get aisle seats, as at least we'll be on the end and have armrests that move.

richardw

bagand96 wrote: »

Interesting. Sounds like a 10 abreast 777 then! But Emirates get consistently better reviews than BA, even though BA operate 9 abreast 777s. (off topic yes, but leads back to my point about people loving to bash BA)

Interestingly the 777 cabin is a whole 30cm wider than the 787, which I guess puts into perspective your points when both are operated in 9 abreast layout. That said most airlines have gone for 9 abreast on the 787 (not sounding so 'dreamy' now!)

Back to the OP's question, I wouldn't be changing my holiday over it!

The diameter of a B777 fuselage is larger than a B787 and thus the window seat curvature effect is less.

BA gets 'bashed' because expectations can be high of this airline. Irrespective of airline, a narrow seat B787 has the same personal shoulder and elbow space problems.

jAL operates 2-4-2 B787 http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Japan_Airlines/Japan_Airlines_787-800.php#

Being a very well travelled money saver, I do feel that paying to avoid this economy high discomfort experience is well worth it and would avoid the dread towards the end of the holiday of travelling on this aircraft.

Btw let's not forget Britannia/thomson operated a B767 in narrow seat 2-4-2 all the way to Australia in the past.

photome

Tiggy_Wiggy wrote: »

Thanks everyone for your comments. I do appreciate we are travelling economy and shouldn't really expect much.


When reading reviews on most things you generally get a mixture of both positive and negative of experiences. However, although I didn't read them all, as I scrolled down the reviews, there wasn't one positive that I saw. And this is what concerned me.


We are going to look at the cost of moving up to PE, failing that we'll try and get aisle seats, as at least we'll be on the end and have armrests that move.

Thats got me thinking, I thought most aisle arm rests were fixed

Nick_C

For specific flight reviews, have a look at https://www.airlinequality.com

Most BA economy seats are 17.5" wide with a 31" pitch, although I take the point about how this will seem cramped on the 787. I've read lots of positive views about the 787 though, and most airlines fly with the 3-3-3 configuration (which I hate - much prefer 2-5-2 but everyone is phasing that out).

I've flown to Canada with both BA and Air Canada in recent years. Not much to chose between them, but I would avoid AC now they are packing 2-4-2 into the 777-300. I found BA cabin crew very unprofessional on my last flight back from Calgary. They refuse to help people to stow overhead bags. They don't enforce size limits on carry ons. As a result, the plane pulled away from the jetway with people still standing and trying to stow bags while the BA cabin crew shouted at them.

I do find BA's economy seats to be OK and reasonably comfortable.

I would book PE if its affordable, but the advance booking price is often ridiculous -I've seen it at double the economy fare. I usually try to get a paid upgrade at check in, and expect to pay about £190 each way for transatlantic.