# 17" seats on airplanes coming



## crabby_appleton1950 (Feb 10, 2015)

*The next airline trend could be narrower seats*
United Airlines is considering introducing an economy section on its long-haul Boeing 777-200 with rows of ten seats abreast-instead of the current rows of nine.
American Airlines is now the only other major U.S. carrier with the ten-seat per row configuration.
The new configuration would allow the airline to add up to 100 extra seats to each plane, depending on the current seat configuration.

... (in) airlines ... which uses ten seats abreast, _the seat width is only 17 inches._


----------



## rrdude (Feb 10, 2015)

ya know, the "Width" has never been an issue for me. For me, it's always been about seat pitch, and leg room.

I hold out no hope for "Better" in either.


----------



## rickycourtney (Feb 10, 2015)

17" seats are unfortunately the norm in economy. I have broad shoulders so it is a problem for me.

Here's the thing... I don't really have a choice in the matter.

I already vote with my money and avoid the airlines as much as I can, but often it's not an option to take the train on long distance trips. I'd be happy to pay a bit more for a better seat, but current "economy plus" seats are no wider or more comfortable (just with more legroom). So I, like most travelers, will begrudgingly accept this change and just try to keep thinking about the good things that await me at my destination.


----------



## jis (Feb 10, 2015)

When Boeing 707s ran with 6 abreast seats they were basically 17" wide seats, like they are on 737s today. To try to claim that in general 17" seats are something new is a bit of rewriting of history I am afraid. Yes going from 9 abreast to 10 abreast on 777s on the few remaining airlines with 9 abreast is a bummer, but that was bound to happen. Many of the otherwise much classier than United are already 10 abreast in Y on their 777s.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Feb 10, 2015)

Good point about the 707s jis!!

Does anyone remember the Laker Airways "cattle cars" to London from JFK in the good ole cheap flights to Europe days?

Or the stretch DC-8s that Areo Mexico flew that allowed " standing room" on in country flights??

The seats were very comfortable! NOT!!


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Feb 10, 2015)

Did those seats sag?


----------



## railiner (Feb 11, 2015)

17" is still not the worst---that 'honor' goes to some 767's with 8 across, and some A330's with 9 across....as little as 16.4 inches, IIRC.....


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Feb 11, 2015)

railiner said:


> 17" is still not the worst---that 'honor' goes to some 767's with 8 across, and some A330's with 9 across....as little as 16.4 inches, IIRC.....


Didn't Aeroflot have some 8-abreast (4-4) Tupolev Tu-114 or was that a rumor?

In China I've seen trains with 6-abreast seating, I believe that the worst on a train. Yes, even some LD trains.


----------



## xyzzy (Feb 11, 2015)

Nothing new about 17 inches, as others have posted. I hate to see 10-abreast on the 777s, and a few airlines (British Airways for one) say they will hold the line at 9-abreast. But I think 10-abreast is clearly where the industry is going.

The forthcoming 777X will have a slightly larger cabin cross-section and will allow some increase in butt room... unless an airline chooses to go 11-abreast. That's a truly awful possibility.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Feb 11, 2015)

Will the 777X be wider or the A380? I've heard rumors of long-haul LCCs planning to fly 11-abreast in A380s.

Check this out on Airbus' new A350XWB site: http://www.a350xwb.com/cabin. 

They say the XWB will have 18"-wide seats, but you know airlines with squeeze another column in there and make it 17" again.

But Premium Economy is supposed to solve the issue for long-haul flights, where comfort really counts. For short-haul flights, it's pretty much "just get me there". Those of you that want 18" seats on short flights can hunt A320s.


----------



## XHRTSP (Feb 11, 2015)

Ha got you all beat. Trying flying international in the back of a C-130 on the cargo net seats...


----------



## xyzzy (Feb 12, 2015)

Be careful about width comparisons. What matters is inside cabin dimensions, taking the curvature of the interior panels into account. Sometimes widths are quoted on the inside skin or the outside skin of the fuselage, or the inside cabin dimensions are measured at the widest point which is not the constraint for seat installation. Apples and oranges. Likewise, sites like seatguru don't always get the dimensions correct. There is no substitute for a tape measure when traveling.

A few charter operators have used 8-abreast on 767s. But the 7-abreast 767 used by most scheduled airlines turns out to be a comfy Y cabin compared to 10-abreast on the 777 or 9-abreast on the 787. Unfortunately most 767s will be taken out of service over the next 5 years.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Feb 12, 2015)

I thought the A330/A340 with 8-abreast was comfortable. I think the A330 will last longer than the 767.


----------



## jis (Feb 13, 2015)

A330s will last, 8 abreast may not. That is always the issue with older planes going into new generation deployment.


----------



## xyzzy (Feb 13, 2015)

Many airliners were designed for an optional door that enables ultra-high density seating to meet the evac requirement. Without the door, no ultra-high density seating because you couldn't evac everyone in time during the certification tests. Charter airlines tended to order the door but most scheduled airlines tended not to. This constrains how many seats can be squeezed into aircraft that have lower evac capacity. Most 767 configurations of the major airlines will have to remain 2-3-2 in Y until the aircraft are disused.


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Feb 13, 2015)

I'll take an Amtrak Coach Chair any day over a seat on a airliner! Now the airlines, especially Southwest, are cutting over to these "next generation" seats they claim provide more comfort in a smaller seat. That is pure Horse Manure and everyone I have talked to who has had the unfortunate luck of having to sit in these things confirms they redefine what being uncomfortable is all about.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Feb 14, 2015)

OlympianHiawatha said:


> I'll take an Amtrak Coach Chair any day over a seat on a airliner! Now the airlines, especially Southwest, are cutting over to these "next generation" seats they claim provide more comfort in a smaller seat. That is pure Horse Manure and everyone I have talked to who has had the unfortunate luck of having to sit in these things confirms they redefine what being uncomfortable is all about.


Really? You'd take an Amtrak Coach Chair over this: http://www.airlinereporter.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/SQ1.jpg.


----------



## CCC1007 (Feb 14, 2015)

that does not appear to be standard economy...


----------



## Bob Dylan (Feb 14, 2015)

Is that picture from Hugh Heffner' s Plane or perhaps Air Force One? LOL


----------



## Groundpounder (Feb 14, 2015)

OlympianHiawatha said:


> I'll take an Amtrak Coach Chair any day over a seat on a airliner! Now the airlines, especially Southwest, are cutting over to these "next generation" seats they claim provide more comfort in a smaller seat. That is pure Horse Manure and everyone I have talked to who has had the unfortunate luck of having to sit in these things confirms they redefine what being uncomfortable is all about.


Me too, but not all of us have 3+ days to travel coast to coast. The furthest I'd take the train would be something like Boston-Washington DC. Anything beyond that is just too long to spend travelling.


----------



## jis (Feb 14, 2015)

No. Just Singapore Airlines.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Feb 17, 2015)

And it's Business Class, not even First Class!


----------

