Boeing to Airbus Transition

My new category does HNL!

Funny non-sequitur story for you. Out for breakfast at some hut in Lihue. I order a Loco Moco and the cashier says in a local-sounding accent: "You know dat rice, gravy, hamburger patty, two egg and side of spam?"

"Yes"

"You sure?"

"Yes."

A couple walks up, seem native Hawaiian and orders two of the same dish I had just order: "That's $21.98"
That’s Kauai AF - I lived there for two years, we miss it very much.
 
I haven't ever flown a Boeing, or any other airliner for that matter, but the Bus is awesome. A lot of the former RJ flights that have gone mainline have gone to the Bus, so there are occasionally long days with multiple short legs. But there are very few red eyes out of EWR, which is nice, and there is more LGA flying than the 737 if that is something that works better for you. Once the 321 shows up, the flying will change to most likely including trips to Europe.

Good luck with your decision!
 
Why does it sound horrible?

Beat me to it.

I'm fine going transcon say LA-NYC, or NYC-FLL in a narrow body. But I wouldn't want to go transatlantic in a narrow body, and yes that includes a 757 too. Since the 767 isn't considered a widebody now. I'd prefer to go transatlantic in a 767, 787 or 777, or 330.

Why? More room. A narrow body would just seem, too tight for that long of a flight. After about 4-5 hrs. doing my annual transcon from ATL-PHX/PHX-ATL, when I was in college visiting home for the holidays on a DL 757, I was ready to climb out of my skin.

In the 90's the typical equipment for that route was a 757. Occasionally they'd put 767 on that route, it was nice and more spacious. Then America West started doing the route as well and my parents put me on that instead (it was cheaper than DL) and it was an A320. The 767 was still preferred for me. So to answer your question, preference and comfort.
 
I'm fine going transcon say LA-NYC, or NYC-FLL in a narrow body. But I wouldn't want to go transatlantic in a narrow body, and yes that includes a 757 too. Since the 767 isn't considered a widebody now. I'd prefer to go transatlantic in a 767, 787 or 777, or 330.

Why? More room. A narrow body would just seem, too tight for that long of a flight. After about 4-5 hrs. doing my annual transcon from ATL-PHX/PHX-ATL, when I was in college visiting home for the holidays on a DL 757, I was ready to climb out of my skin.

In the 90's the typical equipment for that route was a 757. Occasionally they'd put 767 on that route, it was nice and more spacious. Then America West started doing the route as well and my parents put me on that instead (it was cheaper than DL) and it was an A320. The 767 was still preferred for me. So to answer your question, preference and comfort.
Unless you’re doing handstands in your seat or you’re in a lie flat seat, does it really even make a difference? If anything being sandwiched in a row with 4 across sounds worse.
 
Done with your CFI yet? :p

Start in the spring. March/April.

Unless you’re doing handstands in your seat or you’re in a lie flat seat, does it really even make a difference? If anything being sandwiched in a row with 4 across sounds worse.

This was in the 90's, I was in first class on the 767. Which is where my experience originates from. Never had the pleasure of being in lie flat, too poor. One day though. One day. Yeah, I'd guess steerage would be about what you described. But are we at least in agreement that going transatlantic in a 737 would be pure hell?
 
Start in the spring. March/April.
This was in the 90's, I was in first class on the 767. Which is where my experience originates from. Never had the pleasure of being in lie flat, too poor. One day though. One day. Yeah, I'd guess steerage would be about what you described. But are we at least in agreement that going transatlantic in a 737 would be pure hell?

The seat is the same short of a tenth of an inch or two in width.
 
The seat is the same short of a tenth of an inch or two in width.

Which seat are you referencing? Also I'd guess that the seat pitch was better in 95, than today. And the rare occasion that the rents sprung for 1st on some of those DL flights, that seat was pretty big compared to coach, and pretty comfortable.
 
It's literally pretty much the same cockpit as any Airbus wide body doing that route, which isn't even THAT long compared to a transcontinental anyway. As far as the back, coach is coach.

Done with your CFI yet? :p

And there will probably be a bunkie.
 
United is going to have the narrow body equivalent of Polaris seats on their 321XLR’s including doors, and premium economy. I doubt you’ll be much less comfortable than in a wide body. Coach will suck, but coach on a wide body will such just as much.
 
United is going to have the narrow body equivalent of Polaris seats on their 321XLR’s including doors, and premium economy. I doubt you’ll be much less comfortable than in a wide body. Coach will suck, but coach on a wide body will such just as much.
I flew coach on a United 757 from IAH to LHR. That seat was more comfortable than the American 787 Dreamliner coach seat on the flight back.
 
Widebody vs narrowbody doesn't matter. For comfort it's all about seat width and pitch.


For long range flights I'll take narrowbody FTW, Alex...


F41C8516-7C96-4AE5-9B6B-CF793B5EB4F8.jpeg
 
I'm fine going transcon say LA-NYC, or NYC-FLL in a narrow body. But I wouldn't want to go transatlantic in a narrow body, and yes that includes a 757 too. Since the 767 isn't considered a widebody now. I'd prefer to go transatlantic in a 767, 787 or 777, or 330.

Why? More room. A narrow body would just seem, too tight for that long of a flight. After about 4-5 hrs. doing my annual transcon from ATL-PHX/PHX-ATL, when I was in college visiting home for the holidays on a DL 757, I was ready to climb out of my skin.

In the 90's the typical equipment for that route was a 757. Occasionally they'd put 767 on that route, it was nice and more spacious. Then America West started doing the route as well and my parents put me on that instead (it was cheaper than DL) and it was an A320. The 767 was still preferred for me. So to answer your question, preference and comfort.

did I accidentally click on airliners.net?
 
Back
Top