QF announce non-stop Perth-London B787 Services

[downgraded]

I have not had anyone I know say that they would fly again on the 787-9 PER-LHR-PER in economy. Everyone says never again because the seats are just too small and that includes slim folks.

I've done it twice now (QF9 on 787). Second time I'd put in an upgrade request however the points requirement was outrageous and after continuous monitoring of seating and 2 or 3 seat changes on my part I was quietly confident I wouldn't have a neighbour. I cancelled my upgrade request about 48 hours out and had an empty seat next to me . Same old issue - if the person next to you is small, the experience is okay, but someone of the same dimensions and it's an issue (I'm not big).

QF2 on the way home had a large person next to me and even on A380 it just doesn't work.

When you can't actually sit straight in your seat then the industry has failed and I wonder where the class actions are?. QF hasn't differentiated its Y offering and so it's either been a last minute necessity or so cheap you couldn't pass it by. I'd happily pay a significant Y premium for some guarantees but currently I'd like to think QF has a captive market in PER and otherwise a customer base doing it for the first and last time. But then perhaps if you only fly once every couple of years you don't realize how low the 787 has taken the flying experience.

 

[suze2000]

If you only fly every couple of years, you are unlikely know enough to even realise that it's the 787 that's at fault. Certainly it wasn't until I moved to MEL and started flying 737s regularly that I realised that there was a difference in seat widths according to craft, and not just airline (up until then, I had refused to fly VA, and back then, QF was still pretty much all A320s/A330s or 767s from PER, sometimes you even got a 747).

 

[downgraded]

If you only fly every couple of years, you are unlikely know enough to even realise that it's the 787 that's at fault. Certainly it wasn't until I moved to MEL and started flying 737s regularly that I realised that there was a difference in seat widths according to craft, and not just airline (up until then, I had refused to fly VA, and back then, QF was still pretty much all A320s/A330s or 767s from PER, sometimes you even got a 747).

Really it's the airline at fault, or Boeing.
I've only just realised the now standard 9 across 787 actually had the same advertised seat width as a 737! That explains much. I knew it was narrow but that's just taking the p#_$.

 

[suze2000]

Oh I know it's the airline's fault, but with the exception of JAL, all the Boeings that aren't 747s or 767s have narrow seating because the airlines have squished in more seats into the modern models. (I admit I've never been in a 757 so can't say about that) Nobody with an Airbus has done that yet.

 

[BD1959]

Oh I know it's the airline's fault, but with the exception of JAL, all the Boeings that aren't 747s or 767s have narrow seating because the airlines have squished in more seats into the modern models. (I admit I've never been in a 757 so can't say about that) Nobody with an Airbus has done that yet.

The 757 cabin was virtually the same width as a 737 (about 0.1" difference) - not a wide-body. Used to love getting these things between LHR and MAN, was like a rocket on take-off.

Regards,

BD

 

[JohnK]

I have not had anyone I know say that they would fly again on the 787-9 PER-LHR-PER in economy. Everyone says never again because the seats are just too small and that includes slim folks.

I was under the impression this route was a success.

The route hasn't been around that long but surely someone that has already flown this route will next time go via SIN or DXB/AUH even if losing a few hours of travel.

 

[Tom/PER]

I'm 6'1 and fairly solid, I'm also a hardworking regular Australian who doesn't have 100,000's points to upgrade to W or J class.Seat measurements don't mean anything to me either, it's all about real world comfort and ergonomics. The Y seat in the QF Dreamliner is an exceptional.

I flew QF9 back in early April spent 4 nights in Birmingham then flew back home to Perth on QF10 and have to say it was one of the easiest flights I've ever done in Y and I was in 56A with no vacant seats around me the kiwi chap in 56B also had fairly broad shoulders.

The seat was comfortable, the IFE was plentiful, there was plenty of food and beverages avail on request and the snack bar at the rear was great, the UK based crew were awesome (even scored a set of J pyjamas) and I managed plenty of sleep.

I believe some of the comments on here are being grossly exaggerated about the comfort of the Y seating, I'd have no hesitations flying the Dreamliner again to LHR tomorrow in Y.

There's plenty of negativity on here about it, but there's also plenty of choice out there, so if you don't think you could possibly bare sitting in one of these said seats for 16-17 hours, fly another carrier or use your precious points.

 

[levelnine]

If you only fly every couple of years, you are unlikely know enough to even realise that it's the 787 that's at fault.

I agree. But the route won't be profitable if it is solely filled with once-every-couple-of-years flyers and all the repeat customers go via SIN or take a competitor route. Qantas needs repeat Y customers to choose this plane to make the economics work.

There's plenty of negativity on here about it, but there's also plenty of choice out there, so if you don't think you could possibly bare sitting in one of these said seats for 16-17 hours, fly another carrier or use your precious points.

That's precisely the problem for Qantas. The Y seat is as bad as, or even inferior to, most of its competitors (your positive review is a rare exception), and Qantas is certainly not the price leader (there are far cheaper alternatives for getting to Europe).

 

[moa999]

Plenty of others now using the 787 though, and often with less seat pitch

 

[snooze]

Plenty of others now using the 787 though, and often with less seat pitch

Yes but a lot of are LCC. Something that qf market that it is not. In my view, an extra inch of legroom is not enough to make up for the 3-3-3 configuration and the tight aisle. I now avoid the 787 of this.

 

[levelnine]

Yes but a lot of are LCC. Something that qf market that it is not. In my view, an extra inch of legroom is not enough to make up for the 3-3-3 configuration and the tight aisle. I now avoid the 787 of this.

And even fewer of them fly 17 hour flights.

 

[downgraded]

I was under the impression this route was a success.

The route hasn't been around that long but surely someone that has already flown this route will next time go via SIN or DXB/AUH even if losing a few hours of travel.

QF1 arrives at LHR a couple of hours after QF9. The airport is busier, the M25 becomes a car park. In my case those 2 hours

I was under the impression this route was a success.

The route hasn't been around that long but surely someone that has already flown this route will next time go via SIN or DXB/AUH even if losing a few hours of travel.

QF9 arrives a couple of crucial hours earlier than QF1. When wanting to get away from London, the earlier arrival makes a big difference.

 

[moa999]

From airliners, one of the posters .has crunched the April BITRE data.

Load factor for QF9/10 for the month of april 2018, this is done by adding pax flying from MEL to LHR and those flying from PER to LHR (excluding those flying PER-MEL as those are not taken into account in this document since they are considered as domestic passengers):

Outbound to London: 6569 pax, 92%, average: 219 pax
Inbound from London: 6249 pax, 88% , average: 208 pax
Total: 12818, 90%

Proportion of total pax flying to/from PER (excluding those flying PER-MEL): 73.7%
Proportion of total pax flying to/from MEL (excluding those flying PER-MEL): 26.3%

 

[bablong]

I was under the impression this route was a success.

The route hasn't been around that long but surely someone that has already flown this route will next time go via SIN or DXB/AUH even if losing a few hours of travel.

I know two people who did it recently return and both have said they would do it again. They were in economy.

 

[jakeseven7]

I know two people who did it recently return and both have said they would do it again. They were in economy.

Have done 4 times, all in premium Y and has been great, plane has been relatively full and have heard commercially they are doing well from the route thanks to huge corporate support and bookings in J.

 

[downgraded]

I know two people who did it recently return and both have said they would do it again. They were in economy.

I agree with much of what Tom/PER said. The seat itself is very comfy and the legroom good, the general service, food IFE etc all were acceptable .I just beg to differ on the width issue - as noted earlier the A380 still fails for large people as well IMHO. My first qf9 experience I had a smallish lady next to me and it was okay, the second flight I had an empty seat, problem solved.
QF2 had a bohemeth next to me and it was worse than my 787 experience.

Maybe QF needed to make the comfort seat process a bit less opaque, and ensure it doesn't interfere with upgrade options (I think I read it does).

 

[Ansett]

Plenty of others now using the 787 though, and often with less seat pitch

Just as a matter of interest and comparison below is a selection of 787 operators and seat width and pitch. Qantas certainly inst leading the field but is not the worst check out air France and Jetstar. However after all the hype Qantas have put out about the 787 being a game changer and how they are investing in ensuring the comfort and well being of passengers it just doesn't measure up. Have a look at Korean if they can do it why cant Qantas.

Hardly a game changing aircraft or set up.

 

[JohnK]

I know two people who did it recently return and both have said they would do it again. They were in economy.

Thanks. That is interesting. The seat widths posted above scare the hell out of me.

 

[moa999]

Just as a matter of interest and comparison below is a selection of 787 operators and seat width and pitch. Qantas certainly inst leading the field but is not the worst check out air France and Jetstar. However after all the hype Qantas have put out about the 787 being a game changer and how they are investing in ensuring the comfort and well being of passengers it just doesn't measure up. Have a look at Korean if they can do it why cant Qantas.

Hardly a game changing aircraft or set up.

View attachment 130576

Agree its not a game changer but I don't think you can game change with Y... I also don't see those figures above being correct - unfortunately there is no standard measurement and there are wildly inaccurate figures all over the web.

The Boeing standard 9-abreast config is 18" aisles and 17.2" seats. I suspect all 787 operators (ex JAL and some ANA aircraft) are actually 17.2" plus or minus a smidgen.

There is no way AA or Korean have 18" seats unless the aisles are so narrow that you couldn't push a trolley through them.

Indeed this blog review quotes AA at 17" width and 31" pitch in economy Main Cabin, and 35" in the Main Cabin Extra (ignoring bulkheads)
A Tour of American Airlines’ Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner

And this one Korean at 17.2" widrh and 33-34" pitch
Where to Sit When Flying Korean Air's 787-9: Economy

 

[travellerqff]

I'm 6'1 and fairly solid, I'm also a hardworking regular Australian who doesn't have 100,000's points to upgrade to W or J class.Seat measurements don't mean anything to me either, it's all about real world comfort and ergonomics. The Y seat in the QF Dreamliner is an exceptional.

I flew QF9 back in early April spent 4 nights in Birmingham then flew back home to Perth on QF10 and have to say it was one of the easiest flights I've ever done in Y and I was in 56A with no vacant seats around me the kiwi chap in 56B also had fairly broad shoulders.

The seat was comfortable, the IFE was plentiful, there was plenty of food and beverages avail on request and the snack bar at the rear was great, the UK based crew were awesome (even scored a set of J pyjamas) and I managed plenty of sleep.

I believe some of the comments on here are being grossly exaggerated about the comfort of the Y seating, I'd have no hesitations flying the Dreamliner again to LHR tomorrow in Y.

There's plenty of negativity on here about it, but there's also plenty of choice out there, so if you don't think you could possibly bare sitting in one of these said seats for 16-17 hours, fly another carrier or use your precious points.

I agree with you 100% !

I’m 6’4” and have done this flight twice. Honestly had no complaints, even stuck in a middle seat on one flight. And I will take it again. It’s about an hour longer than LAX-MEL on the same aircraft, which I did a couple weeks ago.

The PER/LHR/PER service is just an ease for covering such great distance. I didn’t notice seat width or the extra legroom anyway. Was totally engrossed with my movies and snacks, and I even slept well.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions but I’ve read a lot of negative opinions on AFF from members who haven’t been on the flight yet.

Let us be reminded and appreciate that we are not travelling on the roof of an overcrowded train through a 3rd world country.