It sure feels different when you're alone. You need the fully experience when you're sandwiched between others. I don't think you will be casually resting your elbows and cross your legs.
No, just no. Reminds me of Southwest torture, shoulder to shoulder, fighting for the armrest and he was on the bulkhead. Eexcept it's for 12hrs, not just Southwest 30min to Dallas.
He explained why though...the A350 is too narrow to make it widespread but the 777 and 787 are just wide enough. Maybe watch the whole video before commenting
@@jacobwasserman9505 Well then why are the Boeings describes as cramped if they are wider? And why soften the impact of 10 abreast in the A350 if it is narrower and therefore more cramped? You can't have things both ways.
@@DaveMiller2 Still, the whole experience of every Airbus I have flown trumps the Boeings I've flown. Funny that the Boeing I like best is the 717, for seat width. Any airline can do anything they want, really. While I love Airbus, one of the worst flights ever was on a Northwest A320 from MHT to DTW. They crammes the rows in there and my knees were embedded in the seatback without anyone reclining.
@@DaveMiller2 currently. A350s are not 10 Abreast. 9 abreast A350 is slightly wider and more comfortable than 9 abreast 787. Comparing 777 and a350 is silly, as they are too different of aircraft.
@@ericwalker2434 comparing the 787 and A350 is just as silly. They’re in different segments of the widebody market, with the A350-900 being larger than the 787-8 and 787-9 and the A350-1000 similar to the 777-8. So its easy to see that the 3 planes mentioned are not direct competitors.
If I know in advance that the plane has 10 abreast I’ll pass. Being a slightly bigger guy I want room to relax my arms at my side instead of squeezing my shoulders together. I once ended up on a 3 hour flight where three of us bigger guys were squeezed together behind the bulkhead. That was the most uncomfortable flight in my life.
I won’t avoid 10-abreast like the plague, but I’d still chose 9-abreast if it was an option. I’d rather see airlines improve their product offering, like higher quality pillows, blankets and entertainment headphones for long haul flights. Give me all that and I think I’ll forget about 10-abreast pretty quickly.
@@rwburt9701 I agree that if you have wider shoulder (or you're wider in any other way) it can be cramped but economy will most likely be cramped for you anyway as 0.2 in of a difference won't change much. On the 9 abreast version on this new variant you'll have much wider 18.7 in seats vs 17.6 on a 9 abreast 787. As for tall people, I doubt any economy seat will suffice so you either suffer, add money for an emergency exit/first seat or get economy plus (or any other name the airline called it). i agree with Coby that most regular carriers will prefer to leave it with 9 abreast. As for low cost, this seating scheme appears to be a bit better than what they offer today.
Having experienced sitting in a 9 abreast United 787 cabin as a 6’4“ guy in between two others on a 9 hour trip, I always make sure to book onto Delta‘s A330 neo‘s with 8 abreast. It’s a huge difference despite it being basically an older generation airframe. Tough nothing beats their A220‘s when flying coach.
I sat in a middle seat on a 10-abreast 777 from SFO to LHR and it was one of the worst experiences of my life. The cost difference between economy and economy-plus was about 40% on that flight. 40% more for maybe 5 to 8% more room. IMO the airlines see no floor for their passengers' misery if the passengers want cheap tickets.
@@ThatAverageMTBer 5'10 but that wasn't the issue. The connecting flight was late and there was no room in the overhead for my backpack so it had to go under the seat in front of me and there was zero room to extend my legs. You are correct, with nothing under the seat in front there would have been "manageable" legroom.
@@spiderbootsy well its kinda does have to do with people being packed like sardines... one could argue more passengers equals more hand luggage equals lugagge going under seat and denying leg room so yh...
For clarification, Airbus *did not* pay me to make this video. In fact, I spent several thousand of my own dollars to make this trip possible. The opinions contained within are mine and mine alone (though Airbus did cover my flight out). Also I'm 5'10".
Despite the typical hate comments, this is a wonderful high quality video, and the hate is not deserved, it's only people panicking about a minor change. It's still economy, its still going to suck.
There another component you forgot: This gives Delta the opportunity to differentiate their 5 cabin classes! Currently, there isn't much difference between Basic Economy, Main Cabin, and Comfort+. In the future, Delta's A350 Basic Economy could have 10 seats per row...
But how many of that cabin ends up being 10 abreast and how much 9? Is it like premium economy where there are only a couple rows of 9 abreast and the rest 10?
@@YHDiamond "Always?" Just because airlines had two cabin classes in the 1980s, doesn't mean that this is always the same... Today, there is clearly a market for at least 5 different cabin classes: First class, business, premium economy, economy, and low-cost economy. Be it within the same airplane, or at different airlines. As stated: for Delta, a new Basic Economy class with 10 seats per row, would be the cheapest new cabin introduction in Delta's history - with very low risks.
I flew an A350 XWB on Lufthansa from Boston to Germany, pretty sure it was 10 abreast. Horrible. I now go through the aircraft cabin details when I book long flights. Last time I checked, Lufthansa now offers the former eco class (8 abreast) as premium eco closer to the front of the aircraft at ridiculous prices. I haven’t flown Lufthansa since that last horrible experience. People will get screwed once but will be vigilant next. These seats are just unbearable for 8 hours. I’m not even a big guy. I can’t imagine how a 6ft+ person even fits.
It's not 100% the fact that it's uncomfortable (but i still think it looks tight), it's that 9 years ago Airbus bragged about having 18" wide seats on all their planes!
@@remi_gio Yeah, that is a positive! (and i guess JAL would be delighted!) but airlines love profit and we might (hopefully not) see big airlines squeeze in even more passengers.
@@princekamoro3869 Yeah exactly! The entire industry is moving to price over everything else (admittedly we kind of caused it) and now 17" seating is kind of everywhere!
I was in a 777-200 just yesterday on a 9 hour flight and that plane had a 9 abreast seating layout and was full to the brim. And as a larger guy, I struggled to sit comfortably in the middle between the window and aisle seat. Personally, packing more passengers is fine on a short flight within Europe where I live, in fact the Ryanair flight I took to Budapest was 3 hours and was not unreasonable. But tripling that time really pushed my limits of staying comfortably in my seat.
I regularly fly around 3 hrs short haul for my travel in Europe and for me economy is fine and I like how it's upgraded as the flight is longer. Only thing I'd really like is to be in the a220 more since its more comfortable than the a320 and 737
9 abreast is the comfy version of the 777, 10 abreast is the norm on 777s these days. The only generally good econ seats on 777s are Singapore and JAL. Delta's are the best 777 seats of a US carrier, United's -200s still run 9 abreast but those cabins are pretty dated and their -300s are all 10 abreast.
Fact: for my next long distance journey I had the choice between 4 options. 2 had 10 abreast in B-777. I declined. My choice was not the cheapest. And total travel time is longer in the go flight. But 9 abreast and 34” seat pitch. Guess you know now immediately which airline I choose…
the fact is, most airlines would not lower their fare even is they fit 10 seats abreast, they just set the price based on destination, season and timing of the flight
Try going too an air museum and look at a 1960's plane layout. The seats were not great - but the space was incredible. More leg room than business class today(!!). Also, almost no overhead locker space, but back then people did not bring their closets with them on board. (Yes; tickets were also relatively much more expensive back then, maybe we sometimes get what we pay for.)
Admittedly, I haven’t flown on an A350 in a while. However, on the flights I’ve been on over the past year or so (A380, 777, A330, A320) there’s always been a mad dash to the over head compartments. Part of that is due to the fact that it’s winter and everyone has coats that need to be stored, but the fact that most legacy airlines now also charge for checked bags doesn’t help.
At the beginning of the video, it's already clear that only one person can use the armrest. The adjacent person will definitely not get an armrest or two. Colby had definitely let the free trip get to his head.
You better believe the airplane type is THE most important for me, leaving for SFO from YUL, had my choice of flying 737 or A220 (Air Canada) choice was easy, a bit more expansive on the A220 but worth it(confort, quietness)
Seems awfully similar to the basic economy shinanigan that started with the budget airlines and has now spread to every airline in the US. In the beginning it was meant to be a super cheap way to fly, now it basically became a way for airlines to squeeze an extra $30-$60 out of you if you want even the most basic amenity like a carry on or advance seat selection. I see this happening with seat widths and comfort as well. 😒
Man those dimmable windows are waaay better than the 787...but I personally dislike dimmable windows because the crew almost always locks them in the dark position after reaching cruise altitude I also feel that the a350 we can fly in for the next 5 years or so will have 9 abreast seating...but as the airframe gets older and less fuel efficient relative to competitors, airlines might have no choice but to switch to 10 abreast.
It's been over a decade since the 787 introduced its dimmable windows. Of course dimmable windows designed in the 2020s should be better than those designed in the early 2000s
Colby... thanks for the research here. I would have liked to see you test this while sitting between 2 other passengers instead of having the entire row to yourself. I need to do my homework to see if I can tell which configuration is being offered when I purchase a trip. Thanks for the info.
This wasn't research, this was a Airbus commercial in video form. Just repeating all their marketing claims with little pushback or verification. Very disappointing video from this channel
First, dont kid yourself Cathay pacific isn't 1/1000th the airline it once was and hasn't been for over a decade... Second, how does this give us consumers more choice? Say you're based in HKG ... You're stuck with the one airline currently flying that route on a 9ab a350 on daily frequency. Yay. Now CX cuts frequency and goes 10ab. And said airline blesses us with a fare increase on the route. But, Coby explanes I should be grateful for the choice ...
Coby, you should have sat in a 9 abreast and 10 abreast, and measure both with a measuring tape. Those 2+/- ish inches matters a ton on flights over 6 hours. I know its stated on your video buy a measuring tape would do wonders. The 10 abreast looks uncomfortable if you have to keep your arms to yourself the whole trip, while a wider seat, you can at least relax and open up your arms a bit. Those arm rests look very narrow on the 10 abreast, at 4:47 your arms are on both armrests, and in a flight u might have to fight to get 1 armrest. If your fatter or wore a jacket, its a problem.
It looks like a compromise only budget airlines would settle for. Well, as you said with he rise of long haul budget carriers, it's no mystery that leisure traveller's would sacrifice a bit for a nice cheap vacation. Smaller seating sure could be a problem for some people, but its not possible to have it all. That was really amazing work done for that video. Really impressive!
I want to see a Low cost sleeper, just like a capsule hotel on longer routes on routes longer 8 hrs of flying. Passengers will feel more fresh when they land and carry on with their activities on the time they land.
I flew in economy from Toronto to India with a stop in Paris. Toronto to Paris = a350-900 Paris to India = b787-9 I found the 787 more comfortable and more spacious. This was with Air France btw
12:50 if these windows are able to be controlled by the individual passengers its a good thing. But I could not imagine how infruriating it would be to pay 500€s or more for a flight and then be denied a look outside if the airpline crew thinks its a good time to dim the windows dark...
One thing you left out which is the main reason I don’t like 10 abreast is because of how long the wait can be for the bathroom. Not to mention that it takes way longer to board/un board the plane. Was on a 9 abreast 777 and it was Very roomy and comfortable. I was on the exact same plane coming back except it was 10 abreast and had a lot of dealing with crowding. 10 abreast is not good
This is one of the benefits of extending the length of the cabin - adding the extra 35 inches will create more space for the galley/lavs. Airlines can't use that full 35 extra inches for seats because of how the plane's certified, so they'll use it for that instead
For the mainstream carriers offering 3, sometimes even 4 classes on their long haul route with surprisingly small economy cabins, the increase in profitability by squeezing a few more passengers is probably insignificant, or even negative when compared to replacing even more economy seats with the much more profitable premium economy ones.
To be honest, I don't like any widebodies with 3-3-3 or 3-4-3 seating. For any long-haul trip, I'd book a window seat anyway, and would most likely be traveling with ONE other person. So my favorites are the A330 or 767, with 2-4-2 or 2-3-2 seating respectively. No worries about having to wake up a third person, when we want to go to the bathroom or just stretch our legs. I know, the 767 and A330 are old plane designs now and I DO know that some A330s are getting 3-3-3 seating these days... I'm staying well clear of those. I'll fly in an A350, 787 or 777 if the price is right, yes. But I wish both manufacturers will come out with a smaller long-haul model with 2-4-2 seating. Boeing's stillborn new midsize plane was rumored to be 2-3-2, so there's still hope.
I’m sure it has been mentioned by others here, but going to 10-abreast is not only about the individual seat experience. All those extra passengers will need overhead bin space; will need to use the lavatory; not to mention slower delivery of meals with the extra people on board. I did not hear anything mentioned about how Airbus and airlines will address those factors in 10-abreast A350s.
I did! Or at least I showed them on the screen. Most of my audience is still using American Freedom Units so that's gonna remain the default, but I'll make sure I keep flashing the metric conversion on the screen
Look at the picture posted by yourself - your crossed leg takes half of the seat on your right, your left arm takes half of the space on your left seat. Imagine yourself sitting there for 10 hours.
So, it's all abut the airline and nothing about the customer. Those seats can't be any narrower, hand rests any thinner and less padding. I can't imagine being buried in a group of four. Would hate to fly real long haul on a ten abreast A350, it's bad enough on a 777.
It’s frustrating to see the manufactures saying that more seats on a plane will lower the ticket prices …. When airlines never do. I just flew the KLM 787 in economy for 13 hours and it was very uncomfortable.
I’ve become used to the 10-abreast B777 but the A350 has the advantage of a nicer feel in the cabin with the air and whatnot. But yeah I’m really hoping Qatar Airways (my fav airline) doesn’t cave into this like the way they did with the 777 as they were the last of the big 3 Middle Eastern airlines to do that.
@@yaterspoon57especially when the A350 will have the least amount of seat width 😂 This guy saying it’s not that bad when his shoulders are basically almost over to the seats next to him, imagine you are sitting next to two big guys
There was a time only a decade ago that the the vast majority of the 1,000 or so 777s in the sky were 9 abreast - now even the likes of ANA and EVA are moving to 10 abreast. It may not happen overnight, but I suspect in 10 years the vast, vast majority of A350s flying will be 10 abreast as well.
Fair enough, if you don't want to that's totally ok. But it'll give less fortunate people who would otherwise never be able to travel such long distances the chance to do so
I flew on french bee 10 abreast. I can confirm that seats in the back end are more confortable than on Air Tahiti Nui 787 middle segments seats (9 abreast)
Informative video as always, man -- nicely done. Also cool that Airbus consented to your visit. Was setting this up as simple as contacting Airbus's PR department, explaining who you are and requesting a visit?
You can’t test the seats alone, you have to be in a fully packed plane to get the feeling, just back to Paris from Fort du France with Air Caraïbes really an unpleasant experience
I always fly premium economy if it’s up to 8 hrs and day flight and business if it’s night or longer than 9+ hours. I certainly can not imagine flying 10+ hours comfortably in these seats. This is pure stunt, having 10 seats in a row, 10 seats which are maybe suitable for short hops. This is exploitation of the customers pockets where more and more customers will be pushed towards some economy comfort class or further premium and business. I’m the end, no one will benefit other than an airline as we all know that 5-8 first class seats pay same or similar amount like 30 business seats and they pay same amount like 300 economy seats. It’s a pure joke that this 30 additional economy seat will drop the price.
I wonder how financially reasonable it would be to have a separate differentiated cabin class with 10 abreast, like a 10 abreast economy, 9 abreast main cabin, 8 abreast premium, and 4 abreast business. I could imagine the exposure to different cabins would encourage the sales of upgrades, though having so many differing hard products on one aircraft could be less than ideal for carriers.
I think this is a good option for budget carriers. Giving more folks the option. I’m 6’4” and broad shouldered so 9 abreast would be worth the extra money 100%
I'm 5'3 and slim, I dont see how 10 abreast would work for me. And yes the full service airlines will take advantage of this, knowing how greedy they are!
I don't get why people complain about this. Consumers determine what they want. If they want to pay for more space they will get more space. If they don't they will get less space. This option is just a win-win for consumers
@@cobyexplanesI’m glad to see you liking Airbus a bit more now! 😉 I love they were so open and let you explore various things at their HQ. Will you also go to Boeing HQ and do a similar video?
I would rather that they not squeeze more seats in. This reminds me of 787s that were introduced with 2-4-2 and then others eventually squeezed in 3-3-3.
I'll try anything once, even a 10-abreast A350. It is kind hard to tell but those seats definitely look wider than Frenchbee's current 10 abreast layout
The trend for airlines to have 10ab A350NPS isn't a thing now, but it can be a thing when the 777x enters service. Remember, the trend to put 10ab on the 777 wasn't gradual, it was latent and sudden because it was unfathomable until Emirates did it.
@@cobyexplanes As a counter design to the emerging a3xx, there was at that time the 747-500x, which was to be 76 meters long and the 747-600x with a length of 85 meters. It was only a stretching of top and bottom, but not as one aircraft with 2 continuous decks. (Project from 1996/97)
Like others have said, board a 10 abreast seating on say Air Caraibes and sit in any row that has seats in from and behind you, and fly Paris to Havana a roughly 15H flight on a full flight and then describe your experience!
I've flown on smaller planes, narrow bodies such as the A32x series with budget airlines like EasyJet and have never been uncomfortable I can't see these wide bodies being devoid of room. People just like to complain.
I am 195 cm (6’ 5”) tall and weight 109 kg (240 lb) and having a fractional amount of seat width taken away doesn’t matter as much as having sufficient leg room. I more concerned about row density.
I understand that QANTAS are considering using the A350 for a none stop flight from Sydney to London in the A350-1000 in the next couple of years. I think there's a big difference between sitting in a narrower seat for five minutes and feeling OK, as opposed to a 20-hour flight. I flew on a Cathay Pacific A350 flight from Hong Kong to Brisbane. I had to check a video I took to confirm it was in fact a nine abreast configuration. I guess the reason I didn't notice was that there was hardly anyone on the aircraft and my wife and I had three seats to ourselves. Beautiful aircraft.
The “choice” you kept talking about only lies on airlines’ side. Almost no exceptions, consumers will always be held hostage of carrier’s marketing decision, and the only choice would be to fly or not, and you know it.
Airbus Airspace and Boeing Sky Interior seem to slowly be bringing back a sense of the glory days of air travel with a modern twist. Imagine someone describing all the cabin elements of the a350 to a 1950s traveler
Good video, but I have a minor correction: You state Singapore Airlines, Cathay Pacific, and Delta are some of the world's best airlines. Delta is certainly not one of the world's best (no American carrier is, by a longshot).
17 inch seat width on a 10-abreast a350 config is the same as Ryanair and other intra-European carriers use. Tolerable on a 3-hour hop, but oppressively tight for anything longer, especially a 6-12 hour flight.
Time and time again, passengers vote for price over comfort. This precisely why 10 abreast in coach will become standard. The airlines will rebrand 9 abreast as “economy extra” or “premium economy”. No need to massage the message and suggest it won’t happen, which seems to follow the PR handbook rather than the simple facts. They both lead to the same place but one that the relentless march towards denser seating will happen and that that March is passenger, not airline, driven. More videos please!
7:51 - 10 abreast A350s in the Indian or Asia market where people are generally shorter and slimmer in stature is tolerable. A 10 abreast A350 in North America or Europe is a hard NO. I barely tolerate sitting in 9 abreast 787s
You should always check you flight using seat guru to determine the seat width and pitch. For example the UA 777 has an economy seat width of 17.05 and a pitch of 31. On the other hand the 787 has a seat width of 17.3 and a pitch of 32. In this case avoid the 777 like the plague and stay on 787 if there is a choice. If we move to the 350, on SQ the 350 nine seats across has an economy width of 18 and a pitch of 32, which is very good. I suspect at 10 across we will end up with something worst than the 777. However the optimal aircraft is the A380, which has a width of 19 and a pitch of 32. Always and I mean always go for an A380 and avoid something like the 777 like the plague. Finally, if an airline has these narrow seats on any aircraft you can never trust that you may end up with this horrible layout.
At 4:48 you can literally tell if there were 2 guys the same size on either side of him, their shoulders would basically be in each other's seats. Airlines really are the absolute worst, and Coby doing PR for them only undermines his platform.
I flew A350 3-3-3 was very uncomfortable, seat width was 16.7 inch, more 4 inches in the cabin will make seats more narrow. It may be good for charter airlines that that price is the target for the passenger. Any way that's an excellent review from the publisher thank you .
Premium Airlines making their profits on longer routes mostly with the premium classes and upsellings. The average economy passenger books a flight mainly based on price and if not then based on flight times. So even if a passenger in economy have a rather bad sitting experience in a cramped cabin, they will likely book the exact airline again, as long it offers the best price the next time.
The real question that needs to be answered is how comfortable is that seat when sandwiched between two super-sized fellow passengers spilling over into your seat space.
Even skinny you sitting in that plane seat fully took up both armrests. Imagine sitting next to a larger person, or a larger person on both sides of your middle seat. 10 seats wide is misery, especially for long flights like the A350 is made to fly.
Yes, introduced years ago on the 787 and 777. Airbus says that almost all of their remaining a350s in backlog will remain 9 abreast. The key here is timing.
Am so used to A350 the way it is. To make it 10 abreast will kill my enthusiasm especially for my full service flights. The budget airlines should and can do the 10 abreast.
Correct but you have Philippine Airlines go for it. On Roots where they have competition with the East Asian five star carriers if you want a better service pay up extra to fly A35K 3-3-3 economy class. Remember from Hong Kong Taipei Seoul Tokyo and Singapore Changi to MNL🇵🇭 Legacy carriers based in those cities are they expensive option for a Full Service carrier cheaper Philippine Airlines. I asked that question to the Taiwanese and Hong kongers their answer is always this CX🇭🇰 = BR/CI/JX🇹🇼> PR🇵🇭
I don't understand the complaining. I am happy with a slightly narrower seat if it save me like 20€. And I am not really a narrow person. But legroom is much more important for me.
@@suserman7775 ok, fine, now we have different choices for different people. It's not like all airlines use Airbus A350 and also not all users of Airbus A350 will switch to 10-abreast seating.
