Airlines In The Philippines IV

[Arianespace]

filipinoavgeek wrote

Other reviews for it so far don't seem as negative, and they actually flew on the plane. If you are going to be a vocal critic of the seat, you might as well actually walk the talk and try it for yourself. If your suspicions are correct, at least you can back them up.

Like I earlier said, I don't need to fly a plane long haul to prove my discomfort. That is stupid.

For a start, I'm not in the business of reviewing things or pleasing other people. I view it from my own perspective having flown numerous long haul flights. I tell it what it is. Cramp.

It is also a proven fact that a 3-3-3 configured A35k is substantially better than the 3-4-3 abreast plane. Undisputed fact.

Couple it with the fact that I rode already a CX a35K plane in 3-3-3 configuration in a very long haul flight, with equally huge person beside me is sufficient justification to avoid PAL. Their 35k that is.

Thus, it can never be subject to suspicions or speculations. Please note, it refers to the seats of the 35k in coach, not the PAL a359 which I love to fly. Or else, I may be misunderstood again.

If you feel its comfortable based on other persons point of view, then be my guest. That will not sway me from taking them. Sorry

[Arianespace]

ewh1 wrote

On Instagram, he’s onboard PAL, from DXB to Manila for the event. Kinda embarrassing he showed PAL’s business class and said PAL came a long way since 2018x even showing the old dentist chair business class, then after all praises, shows the SMC premium economy section on the hybrid A330

Don't be too excited. Sam never flew economy. So he has no idea what the OFWs comfort level were. On the other hand, Noel Phillips is more down to earth so he knows the crowd better than Sam. Between the two, Noel has more credibility defining most of the airline's passenger that matter.

[ewh1]

Oh yeah, I follow Noel Philips more now too, but still appreciate Sam’s content for its information value. I just thought it was funny because it represented how decisions at PAL have been one step forward, two steps back.

If you like Noel, I think you might like Simon Dean, aka Flight Formula.

https://youtube.com/@flightformula?si=OsueaMslpJ4uG5Xw

He's my favorite reviewer because he’s no nonsense and sarcastic, but he likes going into the socioeconomics of a country and the airline when he does a flight review. For example, he’s given a Philippine crash course on deregulation, martial law, etc. On his flights to/from Manila so I wonder if he’s half Filipino in addition to being Aussie.


I love Noel but he makes him look like a paid spokesperson lol

[ewh1]

Anyways here’s the 85th Anniversary event for PAL. There’s some nice videos of this history along with the speeches and unveiling:

https://youtu.be/c43PvsdUyNs?si=RE2Ep2PrAUEFBstZ

[kilohakdog]

Curious if all PAL aircraft will feature the 85th Annniversary Sticker

[Arianespace]

Nice new theme. But I still relished on the nostalgia of the classic. I think this remains the best there is.

[Solblanc]

ewh1 wrote

Anyways here’s the 85th Anniversary event for PAL. There’s some nice videos of this history along with the speeches and unveiling:

https://youtu.be/c43PvsdUyNs?si=RE2Ep2PrAUEFBstZ

Someone at the event brought a tape measure and showed that it actually is 17" between the armrests hahaha. The armrests are paper thin though.

That being said, the window seats have reduced foot space thanks to the curvature of the plane, and it's treated like the entertainment boxes of old.

[filipinoavgeek]

I found it interesting that Zipair had a presence in that recent travel fair when they're discontinuing their Manila flights in March. Last-minute ticket sales, their appearance was planned before the announcement, or a sign of something else?

[seven13]

Solblanc wrote

ewh1 wrote

Anyways here’s the 85th Anniversary event for PAL. There’s some nice videos of this history along with the speeches and unveiling:

https://youtu.be/c43PvsdUyNs?si=RE2Ep2PrAUEFBstZ

Someone at the event brought a tape measure and showed that it actually is 17" between the armrests hahaha. The armrests are paper thin though.

That being said, the window seats have reduced foot space thanks to the curvature of the plane, and it's treated like the entertainment boxes of old.

It’s the AvGeek Philippines FB page owner. He posted the video on that page.

[kilohakdog]

Someone finally tried the A35K from NYC-MNL, as seen in this Tiktok video: https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSaLkRLBU/

[Solblanc]

kilohakdog wrote

Someone finally tried the A35K from NYC-MNL, as seen in this Tiktok video: https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSaLkRLBU/

So anecdotally, some people don’t notice the seat width shrinking all that much…

…that being said, those airfares better be cheaper if they’re subjecting people to 17 hour flights in those seats. Damn that’s tight.

[ewh1]

seven13 wrote

Solblanc wrote

ewh1 wrote

Anyways here’s the 85th Anniversary event for PAL. There’s some nice videos of this history along with the speeches and unveiling:

https://youtu.be/c43PvsdUyNs?si=RE2Ep2PrAUEFBstZ

Someone at the event brought a tape measure and showed that it actually is 17" between the armrests hahaha. The armrests are paper thin though.

That being said, the window seats have reduced foot space thanks to the curvature of the plane, and it's treated like the entertainment boxes of old.

It’s the AvGeek Philippines FB page owner. He posted the video on that page.

I saw this and felt vindicated, haha. These seats didn’t look abnormally narrow than a lot of the other seats I’ve experienced. Only the actual seat thickness looks thin which at least helps the legroom

Legroom to me matters more. I’m 180cm tall and PAL’s seat looks like it has better legroom to move and adjust. I gather from these seats, they’re almost like a bench so if you need more space, the seat frame won’t dig at you if you go over the seat, at least from how it’s built.

Again if you can survive 17” width with 31” pitch in a 458 77W cabin on Air Canada you can survive anything. Seriously, i couldn’t move my legs to grab my water from the F/A and spilt it all over my seat neighbor. Was very embarrassing.

Let me reiterate though that wider seats would’ve been better. The best seats and cabin in the world is JAL, bar none. Having wide space and generous legroom is worth it.  
Especially flying long haul with them. Probably my favorite airline to fly with

[seven13]

ewh1 wrote

seven13 wrote

Solblanc wrote

ewh1 wrote

Anyways here’s the 85th Anniversary event for PAL. There’s some nice videos of this history along with the speeches and unveiling:

https://youtu.be/c43PvsdUyNs?si=RE2Ep2PrAUEFBstZ

Someone at the event brought a tape measure and showed that it actually is 17" between the armrests hahaha. The armrests are paper thin though.

That being said, the window seats have reduced foot space thanks to the curvature of the plane, and it's treated like the entertainment boxes of old.

It’s the AvGeek Philippines FB page owner. He posted the video on that page.

I saw this and felt vindicated, haha. These seats didn’t look abnormally narrow than a lot of the other seats I’ve experienced. Only the actual seat thickness looks thin which at least helps the legroom

Legroom to me matters more. I’m 180cm tall and PAL’s seat looks like it has better legroom to move and adjust. I gather from these seats, they’re almost like a bench so if you need more space, the seat frame won’t dig at you if you go over the seat, at least from how it’s built.

Again if you can survive 17” width with 31” pitch in a 458 77W cabin on Air Canada you can survive anything. Seriously, i couldn’t move my legs to grab my water from the F/A and spilt it all over my seat neighbor. Was very embarrassing.

Let me reiterate though that wider seats would’ve been better. The best seats and cabin in the world is JAL, bar none. Having wide space and generous legroom is worth it.  
Especially flying long haul with them. Probably my favorite airline to fly with

I understand that narrow seats can get stuffy especially if your are stuck in the middle of 2 large person, it's hard to move and limits your movement but most airlines now have 17" width on their widebodies. I flew with ANA's B777 last December to JFK, 17" width and 34" legroom, it was fairly comfortable. I was seated on a window seat and beside me was a 185cm+ male on the bigger side. He seemed okay except that I noticed that his knees were already touching the back of the seat in front of him. Beside him was his partner, a fairly tall American lady.

I'll have to try the A35K myself in ECY. Hoping to try it soon.

EY's ECY on their B777 and B787 aircraft are the tighest I've been on. Very uncomfortable on the MNL-AUH-MNL leg. I was seated between 2 lolas and I had a hard time. I also had a hard time on EVA's B777. Middle seat on the MNL-TPE sector; the longest 2 hour flight I had.

[filipinoavgeek]

https://business.inquirer.net/570129/cebu-pacific-completing-turboprop-exit-from-naia-by-march
In other news, CebPac and AirSWIFT's remaining turboprop flights are moving to Clark by the end of March.

seven13 wrote

ewh1 wrote

seven13 wrote

Solblanc wrote

ewh1 wrote

Anyways here’s the 85th Anniversary event for PAL. There’s some nice videos of this history along with the speeches and unveiling:

https://youtu.be/c43PvsdUyNs?si=RE2Ep2PrAUEFBstZ

Someone at the event brought a tape measure and showed that it actually is 17" between the armrests hahaha. The armrests are paper thin though.

That being said, the window seats have reduced foot space thanks to the curvature of the plane, and it's treated like the entertainment boxes of old.

It’s the AvGeek Philippines FB page owner. He posted the video on that page.

I saw this and felt vindicated, haha. These seats didn’t look abnormally narrow than a lot of the other seats I’ve experienced. Only the actual seat thickness looks thin which at least helps the legroom

Legroom to me matters more. I’m 180cm tall and PAL’s seat looks like it has better legroom to move and adjust. I gather from these seats, they’re almost like a bench so if you need more space, the seat frame won’t dig at you if you go over the seat, at least from how it’s built.

Again if you can survive 17” width with 31” pitch in a 458 77W cabin on Air Canada you can survive anything. Seriously, i couldn’t move my legs to grab my water from the F/A and spilt it all over my seat neighbor. Was very embarrassing.

Let me reiterate though that wider seats would’ve been better. The best seats and cabin in the world is JAL, bar none. Having wide space and generous legroom is worth it.  
Especially flying long haul with them. Probably my favorite airline to fly with

I understand that narrow seats can get stuffy especially if your are stuck in the middle of 2 large person, it's hard to move and limits your movement but most airlines now have 17" width on their widebodies. I flew with ANA's B777 last December to JFK, 17" width and 34" legroom, it was fairly comfortable. I was seated on a window seat and beside me was a 185cm+ male on the bigger side. He seemed okay except that I noticed that his knees were already touching the back of the seat in front of him. Beside him was his partner, a fairly tall American lady.

I'll have to try the A35K myself in ECY. Hoping to try it soon.

EY's ECY on their B777 and B787 aircraft are the tighest I've been on. Very uncomfortable on the MNL-AUH-MNL leg. I was seated between 2 lolas and I had a hard time. I also had a hard time on EVA's B777. Middle seat on the MNL-TPE sector; the longest 2 hour flight I had.

I'm getting really confused about the online reception to the seats, because some have claimed that, on the JFK flights, they're not wide enough and rather cramped, and others have suggested that they are surprisingly comfortable even taking into account the narrower width.

[UA189]

filipinoavgeek wrote

I'm getting really confused about the online reception to the seats, because some have claimed that, on the JFK flights, they're not wide enough and rather cramped, and others have suggested that they are surprisingly comfortable even taking into account the narrower width.

From what I have seen, the ones travelling in groups tend to be ok with the narrower seats and don’t mind rubbing elbows with someone they know. Solo travellers tend to be mindful of their (and others) personal space.

[airline_builder]

UA189 wrote

filipinoavgeek wrote

I'm getting really confused about the online reception to the seats, because some have claimed that, on the JFK flights, they're not wide enough and rather cramped, and others have suggested that they are surprisingly comfortable even taking into account the narrower width.

From what I have seen, the ones travelling in groups tend to be ok with the narrower seats and don’t mind rubbing elbows with someone they know. Solo travellers tend to be mindful of their (and others) personal space.

The reality is, then again, the A350 no matter what cabin enhancement being introduced was designed to be in the 3-3-3 to compete with the B787 3-3-3 thus the XWB tagline was coined. A direct hit on their direct competitor. People insist otherwise as being a B777 competitor? Nope - wrong. Just recently with the A350-1000 just so vs the B773W.

One cannot compare the B777 cabin abreast configuration because it was and will always be as originally conceptualized as a 10 abreast cabin all space factored in prior to after thoughts like what Airbus did with their 3-4-3 on a 3-3-3 cabin.

Let us quit apologizing for the wrong move that PAL made on their economy configuration with the A35K. Let us just call spade a spade.

Hope PAL executives seriously assess their decision pragmatically post introduction for at least 6 months ops then that would be enough sample survey population.

[ewh1]

Not to argue but technically, Emirates introduced 3x4x3 from the original 3x3x3 layout back in the late 90s early 2000s.  At one point B777s were even 2x5x2, and I remember riding on one from United.

It seems like PAL is just taking a page from their handbook. It’s quite interesting to see how this played out 20+ years ago as it’s very reminiscent of the conversations that are happening again today.

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=123343
https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=355949
https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=666923
https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=171567

[airline_builder]

ewh1 wrote

Not to argue but technically, Emirates introduced 3x4x3 from the original 3x3x3 layout back in the late 90s early 2000s.  At one point B777s were even 2x5x2, and I remember riding on one from United.

Yes, that being a fact, but the architectural cabin panels based on its fuselage exhibits less curvature as compared to the A350, making the 3-4-3 config on the B777 give the psychology of space still.

[Solblanc]

airline_builder wrote

ewh1 wrote

Not to argue but technically, Emirates introduced 3x4x3 from the original 3x3x3 layout back in the late 90s early 2000s.  At one point B777s were even 2x5x2, and I remember riding on one from United.

Yes, that being a fact, but the architectural cabin panels based on its fuselage exhibits less curvature as compared to the A350, making the 3-4-3 config on the B777 give the psychology of space still.

Yeah, when EK first introduced 3-4-3 on the 777, the reactions were the same. "Too narrow!" "777 was designed for 9-abreast!" but eventually, almost every other airline followed their lead.

Same with the 787. Marketed as 8-abreast, but only JAL and ANA fly 8-abreast 787s

The actual reality is that airfares are not really rising relative to inflation. Air travel is getting cheaper. And it's thanks to stuff like this.

Ten years from now, we're gonna see more 10-abreast A350s. It's gonna be sad for the economy class passenger. But good for the bottom line.

As much as we want to criticize PAL, they've still been making money flying those awful 9-abreast A330s around. That horrible hard product didn't do anything to affect their profits. So they'll dry their tears with dollar bills.

Personally, I don't fly PAL. I don't have skin in the game. But apparently, enough people do for them to still make money as a "full service carrier"

[airline_builder]

Solblanc wrote

airline_builder wrote

ewh1 wrote

Not to argue but technically, Emirates introduced 3x4x3 from the original 3x3x3 layout back in the late 90s early 2000s.  At one point B777s were even 2x5x2, and I remember riding on one from United.

Yes, that being a fact, but the architectural cabin panels based on its fuselage exhibits less curvature as compared to the A350, making the 3-4-3 config on the B777 give the psychology of space still.

Yeah, when EK first introduced 3-4-3 on the 777, the reactions were the same. "Too narrow!" "777 was designed for 9-abreast!" but eventually, almost every other airline followed their lead.

Same with the 787. Marketed as 8-abreast, but only JAL and ANA fly 8-abreast 787s

The actual reality is that airfares are not really rising relative to inflation. Air travel is getting cheaper. And it's thanks to stuff like this.

Ten years from now, we're gonna see more 10-abreast A350s. It's gonna be sad for the economy class passenger. But good for the bottom line.

As much as we want to criticize PAL, they've still been making money flying those awful 9-abreast A330s around. That horrible hard product didn't do anything to affect their profits. So they'll dry their tears with dollar bills.

Personally, I don't fly PAL. I don't have skin in the game. But apparently, enough people do for them to still make money as a "full service carrier"

Agree - but then again

"The Boeing 777 series has a wider cabin than the Airbus A350, featuring an internal width of approximately \(19.5\text{–}19.6\) feet (\(5.96\text{–}6.2\text{\ m}\)) compared to the A350's \(18.4\text{–}18.9\) feet (\(5.61\text{–}5.71\text{\ m}\)). While the 777 is designed for 10-abreast seating, the narrower A350 is typically configured 9-abreast, offering more passenger comfort despite having less overall space."

This is the whole point when I was reiterating - what is made for what.