A330 seating layout

hawkwind23

stumbled across this forum and thought id ask a question about the above...

flew with thomas cook airlines long haul to mexico.

i was shocked at the seating layout 3 3 3
is that the normal , i always flew 2 4 2 on that aircraft.

anyways the staff were all mega stressed and grumpy , was hardly room to walk down the aisle never mind push a trolley.
and no drinks or snacks? wasnt happy about that either!


is this now the industry norm?
would there not be union issues with the attendants having to work in such cramped surroundings?

not a nice way to fly and i wont use them again
but sort of worried that this is the new way of doing long haul flights

Tzardine

Emirates do something similar on their 777's to get an extra seat per row. Makes it pretty tight.

hawkwind23

too tight for a long haul!
obviously profit focused but makes me uncomfortable to think what other cuts are being made to serve the shareholders.
in fairness the senior pilot eased her down in the recent winds at Gatwick but on the approach i have a feeling there may of been a less experienced pilot having some training, it was rough!!!

Locker10a

Aer Lingus still have the 2 - 4 - 2 layout 3-3-3 is squished !!Especially for long flights!

Tenger

hawkwind23 wrote: »

......was hardly room to walk down the aisle never mind push a trolley.
and no drinks or snacks? wasnt happy about that either!


is this now the industry norm?
would there not be union issues with the attendants having to work in such cramped surroundings?

not a nice way to fly and i wont use them again
but sort of worried that this is the new way of doing long haul flights

No meals served on a flight from Mexico?


3-3-3 doesn't make it cramped for the crew. And they would not be able to argue against cabin config.

Welcome to the reality of modern airtravel...."how many seats can we cram into this aircraft without p*ssing off any potential passengers"

hawkwind23

yeah its not a nice way to travel and i think people should voice their opposition for it to become the norm.

yes there were meals , 2 on a 11 hour flight but i had to pay for them! same with drinks , was one of those plastic menus that you get on the domestic flights and prices were the same.

i disagree about the cramped conditions for staff , they couldnt push the trolley down the aisle without clattering chair arms and peoples legs. they were so grumpy and stressed and i sympathised with them, looked a crap job.
although one auld dragon seemed to love it , she gave a 15 minute speech on the disabled and sick , then proceeded to beg for people to buy lottery tickets , even offering an exchange rate that was so ridiculous i had to go and ask her was she serious.
man that annoyed me so much.
obviously some half-wit in management has equated the ability to sell scratch cards to performance.

for anyone who hasn't traveled long haul in a 2 or 3 years its all changed as far as i can see.
be a better experience if they could rip all the seats out and just bung you in to lie on the floor

BuffyBot

i was shocked at the seating layout 3 3 3
is that the normal , i always flew 2 4 2 on that aircraft.

anyways the staff were all mega stressed and grumpy , was hardly room to walk down the aisle never mind push a trolley.
and no drinks or snacks? wasnt happy about that either!

Not the norm, but they are a charter airline after all, so what they do will always be different to the scheduled carriers.

It's may be "long haul" but you can't compare the experience to a long haul flight on BA/Aer Lingus/KLM etc.

Thomas Cook also stick 8 seats across their 767's as opposed to the scheduled airlines 7.

basill

You went with a bucket and spade operator who would pay their cabin crew not much more than minimum wage. Had you undertaken a bit of googling you would have found websites where you can check out cabin configs, seat pitch and the expected service. Then you could have made an informed decision as to whether you want to fly with a major or go charter.

GTE

basill wrote: »

You went with a bucket and spade operator who would pay their cabin crew not much more than minimum wage. Had you undertaken a bit of googling you would have found websites where you can check out cabin configs, seat pitch and the expected service. Then you could have made an informed decision as to whether you want to fly with a major or go charter.

Ouch.

keith16

I prefer the more attacking 3-3-3 formation :pac:

Altough IIRC, EI play a 2-3-2 formation usually,

hawkwind23

yeah i made the mistake all right.
was one of those package things so i wrongly presumed there was some sort of unspoken rules over long haul flights with cheapo operators.
so i have been researching and yes there is a site that shows the seating plans

http://www.seatguru.com/

reading the reviews on TC AIRLINES it seems im not the only disgruntled passenger!

i will be using the above site when booking in the future

gihj

BuffyBot wrote: »

Not the norm, but they are a charter airline after all, so what they do will always be different to the scheduled carriers.

It's may be "long haul" but you can't compare the experience to a long haul flight on BA/Aer Lingus/KLM etc.

Thomas Cook also stick 8 seats across their 767's as opposed to the scheduled airlines 7.

A bit late for the OP now but next time perhaps they could try Thomson/first choice instead.
A gigantic saving on the Scheduled airlines + hotel rates.

The Thomson Aircraft on that Route are usually ex-First Choice and in a 2-4-2 config. and from vast experience more comfortable than both Aer Lingus T.A. and B.A on the same route.

Of course most of their future timetable will be with the Dreamliner (some already are) which means a 3-3-3 config. Unless you pay for the Premium Upgrade which is 2-2-2 (i think).
Expensive but extremely comfy and relaxing (with the free drinks and so on).

martinsvi

Strituck wrote: »

Emirates do something similar on their 777's to get an extra seat per row. Makes it pretty tight.

777-3 is wider so it's not a fair comparison... 3-4-3 for 777-3 series is a norm, it's not that cramped at all

3-3-3 for A330 is a nonsense. this is not where industry is going, there was an article, I think in Airliners World, stating that more and more people choose economy+ products that allow more space and legroom, for example BA's premium economy product has proven to be very successful.

However, I guess there will always be people who will go for the cheapest option and then complain for not getting a premium service...

Strumms

martinsvi wrote: »

However, I guess there will always be people who will go for the cheapest option and then complain for not getting a premium service...

With all due respect I dont think the OP is complaing because they didn't recieve 'premium service'. They are pointing out that they found the service and the cramped conditions unfavourable. Because someone gets a chaep deal or what could be percieved beforehand as good value doesnt mean they shouldnt expect decent service and a reasonable comfort level. If you payed 30 cent in a cafe that from the outside looked ok for a coffee and it was cold and had lumps in it... is that acceptable as in you get what you pay for ? hardly !

Also sometimes we forget as either aviation enthuiasts or as people who work in the industry that there are many people out there who are not regular flyers or familiar with the pitfalls of choosing certain airlines or aircraft over others and in this context some of the replies here are a little harsh.

Probably the lesson alone and the experience will hold the OP in good stead going forward in their travels.

martinsvi

Strumms wrote: »

With all due respect I dont think the OP is complaing because they didn't recieve 'premium service'.

I wasn't referring to OP's post per se, there's a general tendency in people to go with the cheapest option and then be surprised that conditions were unfavourable.

I don't know IF in the given scenario Thomas Cook was the cheapest option, but before handing any money to the tour company one must review all aspects of the trip. There's plenty of reviews available.

As for the 30 cent coffee - I wouldn't go near it.

Elegant Chaos

I would definitely advise looking into what's going to deposit you at your destination when you take a charter. In the mid 90s, Budget Travel were doing holidays to Barbados from Shannon. Very reasonably priced for the Carib - probably not much more than going to Greece for two weeks. Arrived in SNN to be greeted by an narrow-bodied Ilyushin 62(?) operated by Aeroflot. That trip was some laugh - Russian only announcements to a bemused bunch of Irish, large amounts of "smoke" (actually dry ice) filling the cabin, broken seats, and nine hours seated within 5 meters of 4 Soviet build engines. Spent the second week of the hols crapping it over the flight home...

hawkwind23

that you for the mellower reply Strumms.

yes , i foolishly expected there to be some unwritten rule that long haul flights were substantially more comfortable than the cheap short hops.
It was a package holiday and a reasonable price but that doesn't take away from the fact that it was very uncomfortable and unjustifiably so.

my point remains that as a consumer i demand much higher customer service and less focus on profit for the operator.
i booked a holiday and expected a certain level of comfort by the agency from the moment i came into contact with them.

this was not the case , i was held captive in a cramped and uncomfortable space with no entertainment or refreshments for over 10 hours. it was a bit brutal truth be told.

my second point is that regardless of chartered or not , as consumers we must voice opposition to this, this is not enjoyable travel.


yes thomas cook was the cheapest by miles , the flight alone wasnt much cheaper than virgin but they have discounted rooms in the hotel i wanted. if i booked direct it was silly money so the package seemed a no-brainer.

just because it was cheaper to book hotel and flight as a package did not suggest that my flight would be almost unbearable.

martinsvi

hawkwind23 wrote: »

my second point is that regardless of chartered or not , as consumers we must voice opposition to this, this is not enjoyable travel.

you're absolutely right and the best way to do it is to make an informed decision before paying the price

http://www.airlinequality.com/Forum/thoscook.htm