Ughh: More 757s going trans-Atlantic
First time here? Check out the site's "greatest hits" or read a random post from the archives. Feel free to ask a question, and consider subscribing to the latest posts via RSS or e-mail. Thanks for visiting!
More and more airlines are downsizing the planes they fly across the Atlantic. Whether it’s service to new cities on smaller routes, or just a downgrade for existing service, Boeing’s 757 has gotten a new lease on life, despite no longer being produced since 2005.
The latest international route in a 757 is US Airways, which last week announced new 757 service from Philadelphia to Brussels. The airline will be installing winglets on its planes to maximize fuel efficiency (and thereby increase the aircraft’s range).
From a business perspective, this certainly makes sense. Some routes simply aren’t profitable with an Airbus 330/340 or a Boeing 747/767/777. The 757 is the compromise.
757s internationally aren’t new. American Airlines was flying 757s to and from Ireland for a while, without even bothering to upgrade the cabin to an international configuration. Icelandair relies on the 757 for the core of their operations. It was Continental that really got things started, though, by adding the winglets to their existing 757s, putting international business class seats up front, and flying the planes from Newark to smaller European markets like Edinburgh, Bristol, Oslo, and Cologne.
Not my idea of a good time
All well and good. But as a customer, I just don’t like this single-aisle plane on long routes. Sure, it can provide point-to-point service for smaller cities, and there’s definitely a benefit in having that convenience. But the comfort just isn’t there on a 757, unless you’re upgraded. A single aisle means more blocked aisles, and less room to get up and stretch. Arguably the ride over the North Atlantic is bumpier than in the widebodies, too.
The seats themselves are no great shakes, either. While every airline configures their seat pitch differently, the 757’s economy-class seats are consistently a narrow 17.2 inches. I have yet to sit in any 757 coach seat — on any airline — that I would truly describe as “comfortable.” These planes are fine for domestic runs, but international service needs a little more space.
8 hours on such a flight? No thanks.
Disagree? Prefer the 8-hour nonstop flight in a single aisle to a one-stop in a widebody? Hit the comments!
(image)
RSS Feed / Subscribe
Subscribe to Posts by Email
January 7th, 2007 at 7:49 pm |
Would I prefer a one stop in a widebody to a non-stop in a 757 ? As I am 6′ 3″ but slim, the seat width doesn’t really bother me, but the seat pitch is critical.
When AA had 34″+ seat pitch, the answer would be YES, give me a 757 with non-stop service.
One better, I used to love being an AA elite FF and snagging the domestic F seats at the front for the price of a coach ticket on BOS/MAN
January 7th, 2007 at 10:25 pm |
I think Northwest’s new service, which has increased coach seat pitch by 4″ might be nicer in some ways then the widebodies.
January 8th, 2007 at 8:31 am |
Chris, true, Northwest’s forthcoming transatlantic 757 service will have more pitch — up to 35 inches in coach (more than their pathetically tight domestic first class seats on some of their DC-9s, which only have 34 inches).
Northwest starts flying 757s Detroit-Brussels on May 7, 2007, Detroit-Dusseldorf on June 5, and Hartford, CT (!)-Amsterdam on July 1.
http://www.nwa.com/corpinfo/newsc/2006/pr101120061711.html
I still don’t think the 757 gives enough opportunity to move about the cabin for a long-haul flight, but more legroom is always welcome.
January 8th, 2007 at 12:21 pm |
I’ve done a transatlantic on a 757, Manchester to Vancoouver with refueling in Iceland. Long trip, not much room - also 6′3″. However, by far the worst transatlantic I’ve ever done was on a 777, Denver to Heathrow. Dreadful, managed to snag 17A (I think) - it doesn’t even have a window! No more room on any widebody of my experience, except an ancient DC10 from Paris to Caracas which was grand. Of the current crop, A330s seem to have better seats and generally seem less bad than the rest. All in all, though a coach class fare is pretty unpleasant for a tall traveller. Given the choice though, give me a widebody with 2-3-2 or 2-4-2 seats - and give me one of the 2s.
January 9th, 2007 at 9:49 am |
I haven never been on a transatlantic on a narrow-body aircraft (I usually fly non-stop from CA). That said, I don’t really see a narrow-body as a disadvantage. Seems to me the ratio of “isle” space to passengers would be roughly the same (yes, there’s only one isle, but there are also significantly fewer seats/passengers) on those aircraft. And I generally try to sleep on long flights, and don’t wander around much (maybe once to the lav, but that’s about it).
One major potential plus for narrow-bodies is that it takes significantly less time to board and deplane.
In short, if I had the choice between a non-stop flight between, say, Detroit and Duesseldorf on a 757, or spending a few hours in FRA to connect on a domestic flight, I’d rather take the overall significantly shorter travel time… and the reduced risk of having my luggage lost or a connection messed up.
January 10th, 2007 at 11:35 am |
Hmmm, after reading this thread, maybe the non-stops on a 757 aren’t quite what the airlines promise, at least in the winter?
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=6986346
May 13th, 2007 at 11:01 pm |
Actually, a 757 takes longer to load when full than a widebody. Think about this: a 757 has 1 aisle to service 6 seats across the plane. A 767 in the old 3-3-3 configuration had 2 aisles to serve 9 seats across–roughly 4-5 seats per aisle. The 777 is similarly efficient for the loading and unloading of pax.
I fly overseas quite often (currently based in Chicago) but have until now avoided the dreaded trans-atlantic 757. Unfortunately, that will change next week when I have no choice but to take the US Airways PHL-DUB segment on a 757. It’s not the worst situation, since the flight is barely 6 hours, but I still expect a certain level of service on trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific flights that I doubt I will receive in this case.
Unfortunately, the only nonstop ORD-DUB service is offered by Aer Lingus and was twice as expensive as US Airways.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:26 pm |
[…] EF dips into the blog archives and writes: I disagree with your hatred of the Boeing 757 for international flights. It’s no different than flying from New York to […]