Long Haul Airline Pilots Preference ?

[UncleDave]

If you could be a passenger on a 10-12 hour flight - would you trade space for higher pressurization in the plane? (little cubicle on 777, vs pod seat on787) both business class.

 

[dishdude]

I've never noticed a big difference between the pressurization on a 777 and 787. What airlines are you comparing?

 

[PandaBear]

I am not sure if I can notice the pressure difference much, but if it is a quieter and more stable plane, I wouldn't mind being slightly narrower.

 

[Speedbird001]

My airline advertises the newer 787s have better temperature, humidity and pressure controls offering increased passenger comfort. I don't know to what degree that is. 1%, 5%, 10% IDK. I've flown in just about all of them, I work on the ground, so not often mind you, but cannot really say there was a difference. Note, i believe each airline has some say as to the EXACT spec of the PACS / HVAC system installed in their model, so YMMV by type, carrier, build date/spec.

FWIW: Upper deck "Club World" on the 747 was my favorite.

 

[97prizm]

Aren't 787s pressurized to 6000 ft vs the standards 8000 ft? I want to say Onevor multi Gulfs models are pressurized to 5k ft.

 

[4WD]

B78, B77, A350, etc can configure 1-2-1 … that’s what you want …

 

[Cujet]

I have a good bit of experience with pressurization levels. Over my Gulfstream based corporate jet career, every subsequent model had higher normal cabin differential pressure levels. With the later models at 10.7PSI.

This means we can effectively maintain a sea level cabin into the mid 30,000 foot range. For practical purposes about 34,000-35,000 feet will show pretty much a sea level cabin on the gauges. However if landing above sea level, some 'tweaking' is necessary to maintain a sea level cabin.

We might do this when the boss has a cold.

FL410, the cabin altitude 2800 and 3000
FL510 the cabin altitude about 4800



Data point of one: My health and fatigue issues resulted in early retirement. Higher than 3000 cabin altitudes were fatiguing. Airline trips with 8000 foot cabins (phone sensor) sucked. The Gulfstream was Much Less of an issue. NOTE: Now that my treatment is correct, cabin altitude sensitivity is back to normal.

 

[Astro14]

The 777 is a great airplane - but the seats make the journey.

That said, in an economy seat, the 787 is noticeably quieter, and more comfortable, with lower cabin altitude.

So, the differences are small - from seat configuration to overall comfort, and either would be a good choice.

The Polaris "pod" seats in our 787 would be a great choice for along flight. 10-12 hours is long, but not Johannesburg, or Auckland, 16 hours long...

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

A320 cruise cabin altitude is 8000, it doesn’t bother me, the noise does.

My priorities as a passenger ( DH ) : room then noise. I don’t care about cabin altitude.

As a pilot: big cockpit ( A320 wins ) then noise ( A320 is loud ).

It’s the noise that used to tire me out until I bought a noise cancelling headset.

I don’t officially do “ long haul” but I spend long days in planes.

 

[Carmudgeon]

I didn't expect that the cabin environment on the newer generation 787s and A350s would make much, if any, difference, but the first time I flew on a 787, I did find it to be a better experience, and less fatiguing afterwards. Same with the A350. Every plane is loud, and I never fly without some ear protection, but they are smoother. It's akin to getting into a nice, modern car, and then getting into your old jalopy and realizing that refinements have been made in the state of the art.

When they are an option during booking, I'll look for the newer planes. Or the 777X whenever it actually enters service.

Only issue I've had during the past few flights is with the temperature. Whomever had the climate controls on a couple of the flights kept the cabin very cool, but that's isolated to the flights and not the nature of the plane.

Another minor thing is with the electro-dimming windows. The cabin crew can override the controls, and taking a peek outside isn't possible, even during non-sleep/daytime if they deem that they should all be dim.

 

[UncleDave]

I didn't expect that the cabin environment on the newer generation 787s and A350s would make much, if any, difference, but the first time I flew on a 787, I did find it to be a better experience, and less fatiguing afterwards. Same with the A350. Every plane is loud, and I never fly without some ear protection, but they are smoother. It's akin to getting into a nice, modern car, and then getting into your old jalopy and realizing that refinements have been made in the state of the art.

When they are an option during booking, I'll look for the newer planes. Or the 777X whenever it actually enters service.

Only issue I've had during the past few flights is with the temperature. Whomever had the climate controls on a couple of the flights kept the cabin very cool, but that's isolated to the flights and not the nature of the plane.

Another minor thing is with the electro-dimming windows. The cabin crew can override the controls, and taking a peek outside isn't possible, even during non-sleep/daytime if they deem that they should all be dim.

On the windows I dont so much mind the loss of control as I can override after X amount of time, what I mind is you cant make them totally black when the sun is shining on it.

The more, more, frequent flyers know where the sun will be at all times and position themselves across from the sun on each leg.

I always fly with my own headsets - bose for travel, marshalls at home.
I always layer a long sleeve hoodie on internationals as most of them are on the cold side.

I seldom use the supplied entertainment outside of their internet connection, and have tons of desk work waiting always.

At 58 I watched Cat on a Hot Tin Roof for the first time on a plane.