Extra Legroom Seats Help

bspm

Try flying business class at the very least, you can actually stretch fully out on a bed.

Worth every penny in my opinion.

:j

bspm

Oh and as for getting it free...when I used to fly Economy I got to chose my seats without a charge, BA (as well as many other airlines) allow people with extra needs through disability to book their seats and for no extra charge.

It never gave me an exit door seat as you need to be physically well abled to sit there but it usually gave me the bulkhead seats in the middle rows, room to stretch out to your hearts content there.

Gloomendoom

I don't like bulkhead seats for the very reason that I can't stretch my legs out. The bulkhead gets in the way. You are also more likely to be sat next to a family with a baby.

malkie76

Caz3121 wrote: »

AA charge for MCE seats unless you hold status (and after traveling in MCE on a recent flight from LA to Hawaii there did not appear to be a noticeable difference apart from being further forward - glad I did not have to pay for them!)

Yes - they definitely charge non-status passengers (sorry for not making that clear), and the only differentiator is the extra legroom, but for the OP this could have been the perfect solution vs the increased fare for a true premier economy product.

malkie76

Gloomendoom wrote: »

I take it that you have never flown with Monarch where the first 9 rows all have 6" extra legroom? Presumably, to satisfy the needs of customers and not regulatory requirements.

That is just one example. I have flown with other airlines that have a similar seat layout.

I'm really struggling to understand your point here given I made it clear that various airlines offer an extra legroom product which isn't a different class of travel.

My point was that the OP expects to get extra legroom seats which are part of the plan design (very much so on BA) as if the seats are positioned there to deliberately give extra room (rather than be a consequence of plane designs).

Sorry for having to hold your hand and walk you through that concept.

peachyprice

Gloomendoom wrote: »

I have had some truly miserable flight experiences when no extra legroom seats have been available. Particularly galling when I can see the seats occupied by short ärses.

In those situations, I must admit that it has crossed my mind that extra legroom should prioritised based on need rather than want.

I'll be bu99ered if I'm going to feel bad sitting in a paid for extra legroom seat because some long leggy didn't get in quick enough when booking their seat.

Tough luck OP, you want extra legroom (don't we all) you pay for it. As yet being tall isn't a disability.

Gloomendoom

peachyprice wrote: »

I'll be bu99ered if I'm going to feel bad sitting in a paid for extra legroom seat because some long leggy didn't get in quick enough when booking their seat.

Tough luck OP, you want extra legroom (don't we all) you pay for it. As yet being tall isn't a disability.

Come the revolution, all shorties sitting in extra legroom seats, paid for or not, will be consigned to the cargo hold.

Gloomendoom

malkie76 wrote: »

I'm really struggling to understand your point here given I made it clear that various airlines offer an extra legroom product which isn't a different class of travel.

You said... "Extra legroom' seats only exist due to how airplanes are built, and regulatory requirements for space at exits. It's not actually deliberate to satisfy the needs of customers."

The point I was making is that this is quite clearly not the case.

Sorry for having to hold your hand and walk you through that concept.

malkie76

We're talking about two different concepts - the seats in a cabin with extra legroom (which is what the OP is referring to), vs a dedicated area or cabin with seats which all have extra legroom.

The seats in a cabin with extra legroom only exist to accommodate the plane design and regulatory requirements. A cabin (or area) made entirely of seats with additional legroom are a deliberate consumer product.

It's not difficult, and genuinely not worthy of a discussion because it (should be) so completely obvious.

leylandsunaddict

Gloomendoom wrote: »

I take it that you have never flown with Monarch where the first 9 rows all have 6" extra legroom? Presumably, to satisfy the needs of customers and not regulatory requirements.

That is just one example. I have flown with other airlines that have a similar seat layout.

But their standard pitch is less than full service carriers. If their standard seats had 31" pitch then I doubt very much they'd be offering extra legroom rows for the length of the flights they operate. It's only 6 or 7 extra legroom rows (depending on aircaft type) though, not 9.

Personally we're glad they do because we fly Monarch twice a year and always book the extra legroom. Jet2 used to have them as well, but they removed all theirs a few years ago.