Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Boeing 757s used on international flights: a good or bad thing for passengers

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Highkeas
    replied
    I fly United 757 Denver to Honolulu - arounda 7-1/2 hour flight - no more uncomfortable than a full flight on any other aircraft.

    I also fly Icelandair 757 Denver to UK via Iceland. Usually economy, but Saga class is exceptional.

    Leave a comment:


  • Highkeas
    replied
    I have now started using Icelandair from Denver to Europe. Aircraft is a 752 with a stop in Iceland. Although a bit cramped no worse than 747 or 777. I like that I can stretch my legs in Iceland for an hour in Iceland. Also Icelandair uses Terminal 2 at LHR which makes for a fast exit.

    I have flown United from Denver to Hawaii on 757 - again no complaints for the 7 hour flight.

    Leave a comment:


  • appleton
    replied
    Took a round trip PHL-LIS on an AA 757 and it was extremely uncomfortable. 6 hour outbound and 7 hour return. Full flights with passengers on stand by.

    I'm 5'11" and weigh 195. Outbound was first row behind first class, with a bulkhead in front and restroom behind. Could not stretch my legs nor recline seat more than an inch. Return flight was in coach and had a left side aisle seat (my preferred location) and it was still tight even with my girlfriend sitting next to me. If I had a middle seat it would be excruciating.

    Unacceptable aircraft assignment for this length of flight. Even a NY-LA flight would be a pushing it, but who am I to say what's acceptable. If I want to travel then I take what they give, and the airlines know it.

    Leave a comment:


  • RingwaySam
    replied
    I flew from Manchester to Orlando via Bangor in 1997 on a Flying Colours 757-200. Was a great flight, been on worse flights...

    Leave a comment:


  • TAP-A343
    replied
    I flew LIS-EWR-LIS back in August 1997 with CO on a B752 in Y class (CO had started the route in May of that year) and I didn't have a very pleasant experience.

    It was more CO's fault than the aircraft itself. It was 7 hours LIS-EWR and 6 hours back.

    The seat pitch was only the usual 31"/32", they had only drop down LCD screens back then and showed only one B or C class film. There was no choice of meals, just chicken outbound and lasagne inbound. The seats were not very comfortable either.

    I felt a bit enclosed on the B752 as there was only one aisle to move around.

    Probably, if the seat pitch had been 34" and I had had a PTV with AVOD I wouldn't have felt so confined on the plane.

    However, considering aircraft with similar seat configurations I always prefer a widebody over a narrowbody for long haul flights.

    Leave a comment:


  • Highkeas
    replied
    For me the main issue is comfort - I would rather fly a 757 with comfotable seat cusions than a 747 with worn out seat cushions.
    Last month I flew LAX to LHR on such a 747 and ended up sitting on my pillow for the 10/11 hour flight.

    Leave a comment:


  • ihatemondays
    replied
    Hi,

    in 2006 I had a flight on a Condor (CFG) B757-300 FRA-ACE (GCRR, Lanzarote, Canary Islands) which is a 5+ hours trip.

    In 2001, I was travelling on an older BA 757-200 FRA-LHR. (short trip, I know).

    My 2 cents:

    If I had an adequate AVOD with in-seat screen and in general a comfortable seat with some more leg room, I would not mind a longer-range trip on a 752ER with RR engines. I love their sound profile. And for LR trips, the seat and private space are what counts.

    Most disturbing was the 753's tendency to flex in turbulence. You could SEE it along the tube length of the undivided all-Eco cabin, like rows 1-30 already go North while you are still on a North by Northwest course. The 752 feels "stiffer" and therefore more stable and trustworthy.
    Yeah, I know, the 753 is safe nonetheless.


    ToM

    Leave a comment:


  • WhiteKnuckles
    replied
    Anybody ever used this? http://www.seatguru.com/charts/domestic_first_class.php

    Interesting when you look at the comparisons. 757 normally seem to have 32 inch seat pitch, but a "version 2" adds 2 inches to that. I recently upgrade to first class for a flight and wow! does that change things! For a long flight, it might really be worth it.
    Last edited by AJ; 2009-07-17, 21:23.

    Leave a comment:


  • BoeingKing77
    replied
    US Airways is giving almost all their 757's winglets to go trans-atlantic,i flew on one PHL-LAS and then i think it was gonnin to Hawaii,and my flight was AMAZING!!!!!!Great food,great seats!

    Leave a comment:


  • LondonJoe
    replied
    I have been on an AA 757 from Madrid to New York.
    It was pretty cramped but it was OK.
    We retured on a Triple 7 which was better but i dont think the use of 757 is a good idea.

    Leave a comment:


  • VAA1001
    replied
    hiya, some really good points as to why it is good and bad. I have flown a few routes on the 757. Firstly, i am cabin crew and have opperated the 757 on long haul routes in the past. It was not a regular thing they did as an airline but you were able to spot the difference in passenger behavior. People did comment that the narrow fuselage, did make them feel really enclosed. The aircraft, like many airlines were not geared up for long flights as they had drop down TV's and small TV's on bulkheads. As people felt a bit cramped, they would try and congregate in the aisle and at the bulkhead by the toilets at the "3" doors just behind the wing. This then obstructed peoples views of the screens. On the other hand, there were 7 cabin crew on it as apposed to the A300 which had about 10 crew but had another aisle. So passengers felt they got more attention from the crew. I recently flew on a 757 from AMS-MSP with Northwest. I dont know about them as a rule but this aircraft was the same, with overhead TV's. I was also able to understand about the enclosed feeling. Its fine for about 4 hours but i did feel the seats were slightly narrower than on a wide body A/C. Maybe this is just perception from being in a narrow cabin for extended periods. People also dont have many places to manouver around to stretch your legs. if you do get up your in the main aisle and feel as though your in everyones way. But on an 8 houur flight you need to move. Those are just some observations i have noticed. I like the 757 but would feel the need to check about the airlines amenities and their cabin configs before i made a reservation for a long haul. A friend of mine recently flew from Verona to Forteleza on air Italy via the cape Verde islands. 757 and took 11.5 hours. That to me is just too long to be on a 757 no matter how good the airline is.
    thanks, take care

    Leave a comment:


  • AA 1818
    replied
    Originally posted by Alessandro View Post
    I always think bigger plane is more comfortable, so if had to choose between a B747 and B757 on similar routes, the B757 loses.
    But, Alessandro - think of it from another point of view - a comfortably furnished 757 versus a European-charter-decked 747. I would prefer to fly on almost any 757 versus a Corsair 747! The thought pattern (that bigger is better) is slowly wittling away as outdated. Like your mama always told you - "it's what's on the inside that counts".

    Leave a comment:


  • Dmmoore
    replied
    Have you ever seen a 747 and a 757 regularly operated on the same internatiional route?

    Leave a comment:


  • Alessandro
    replied
    I always think bigger plane is more comfortable, so if had to choose between a B747 and B757 on similar routes, the B757 loses.

    Leave a comment:


  • AA 1818
    replied
    Ok, just my two-cents...


    1) I could care less about equipment type, if I were properly satisfied with the seats/amenities offered.
    The changes being made to AA on their International fleet of 757s are great, but simply not enough. CO offers PTVs and in time, so will DL. Why does AA assume that TVs spread through out the cabin will be a just substitute? As for the re-vamping of the 757's business class cabins - this was well needed. The cabins have yet to receive an update in more than 15 years. With the improvements being made to the 767/777 business class fleet - perhaps the same should be done with the 757s (with a new solution necessary to more accurately accommodate for space constraints). As for me, I would prefer (any day) to fly on an AA 757 full of screaming babies on a Trans-Atlantic flight than fly on a Corsair 747 on a LHR-CDG route.

    2). "Non-stop" sells tickets...
    Most passengers would rather fly PHL-OSL non-stop rather than PHL-LHR-OSL. Most are not savvy enough to recognize aircraft type, and surely most are not (like we, in this community) are concerned with spotting, logging aircraft types, or being guests of foreign airports. Simple put - the market effected these moves.

    3). The market can also effect a change...
    Most of the times, the 757s are there only as a starter to the route. They are great aircraft with which to test markets and routes. In reality, if the route were to become popular enough to outsell a 757, by all means we are likely to see the airline change aircraft equipment to a larger type.

    4). Whether or not we see the use of 757s as a good or bad thing - it is a reality...
    The routes (and lower capacities) dictate when and how an airline can service the route economically. While I understand the frustrations of those having to suffer through a 7 hour flight on a narrow body, that's perhaps the only way that the route would be feasible.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X