A picture of the new First Class cabin shows that it’s not much different than what’s out there today. It’s just cleaned up, new fabric, etc. That’s ok, because much of a change wasn’t necessary. In Business Class, however, it’s a different story.

As you can see, American is using the same reverse-herringbone style of seat that US Airways has on its airplanes. (Calm down, conspiracy theorists. This has nothing to do with a potential merger between the two.) We can now be sure that the “fully lie flat” seats are going to be flat beds. Whew.

There are also a few things we can glean from the new coach seats.

The above picture shows coach seating, and American confirms that there will be a premium economy section with the exact same seats but more legroom. It’s like American is bringing back “More Room Throughout Coach,” but not actually throughout coach.

In this picture, there are at least 4 seats uninterrupted by an aisle. That can mean one of two things. It could mean that American is sticking with the 2-5-2 configuration that it has on its 777-200s, but that would be surprising. Most airlines have moved away from 2-5-2 to 3-3-3 instead because it requires fewer video power units and it allows for standardized seat sets. (United has switched to 3-3-3 as it renovates its 777 fleet.)

But this can’t be 3-3-3 because there are four together. That would most likely mean that American is moving to the increasingly popular 3-4-3 layout. I say “increasingly popular,” but I mean that only on the airline side. Passengers hate it because, naturally, it means narrower seats. That hasn’t stopped several airlines from going this route, so it wouldn’t surprise me to see American do the same.

We could try to do some math to figure out the number of seats across if American would release its planned configuration on the airplane, but it won’t. My requests were met with the response that no further information is being given at this time. What’s with all the secrecy? I don’t understand why they want to keep pushing out dribs and drabs of info.

Anything else we know? Yep. American had been saying that London would be the first to get the new 777-300ER, but now that’s not happening. The first market will now be Dallas/Ft Worth to Sao Paulo. This market is apparently doing so well for American that it’s throwing a ton of capacity into it. In June, the market goes from a daily flight to 12 weekly. And then in December, the 777-300ER will go on to the route, bringing even more capacity to the market.

I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised that Latin America gets it first. After all, that’s really where American excels. It’s almost non-existent in Asia, it’s pretty weak in Europe, but it is the king of Latin. Stick to your strengths, right?

Seating layout/arrangements
The 777 was in a typical 2-3-2 layout while the A380 had a very interested staggered layout of 1-2-1. Some rows had window seats with a small walkway to the aisle and others had an aisle with no seat in the window. The middle section either had two seats next to each other or two sitting on the aisle separated. The seats then rotate their position, giving each customer access to the aisle. This was a very nice feature as the A380 gives customers much more overall “area” for their individual seat, whereas the 777 you still had a neighbor – and the privacy screen really didn’t block much.

I could still watch my neighbor’s TV for most of my flight. I did select the bulkhead on the 777 and I had more wiggle room to get in and out, but the A380 still wins hands down. The 777′s “traditional” layout is much better if you are traveling with a group of friends or family, as the A380 seems to be designed more for the solo traveler. The other downside to BOTH aircraft is the aisle seats – there is still traffic up and down the aisle, so there’s a risk of getting interrupted while trying to sleep.

Service
One problem Emirates faces with the A380 is that there are a LOT of flight attendants . . . 26 to be exact. The Business Class galley is located in the back of the cabin, so you get a lot of foot traffic. While that can be nice (always someone going by that can you something) it did take time to do a full service for the 55 passengers (out of 76) in my cabin. I also can’t tell you the name of the flight attendant assigned to my section. The 777 provided excellent service as only 2 or 3 flight attendants worked my side of the airplane and I can remember their names. Overall, the 777 service seemed much more efficient.

Boarding/Deplaning
One would think boarding 500 people on an A380 would take awhile, but Emirates seemed to have this one down pat. Most of us in Business Class were in the lounge up until about 30 minutes before departure and found a short line for the premium cabins versus economy. In the A380, I didn’t see a single economy class customer. On the 777, while we had separate lines, we boarded through the same jet bridge. There was a lot of foot traffic through the 777 cabin while boarding, but the flight attendants kept the economy customers moving through, and were able to serve a pre-departure champagne service without any issues. Deplaning was equally fast, as Emirates holds back each respective cabin until those passengers are clear, and in New York we deplaned by the 2nd level. Its hard to pick the 777 or the A380 has both were very efficient.

Sleep
The A380 has a fully flat bed while it’s an angled lie flat bed on the 777. Both seats appear to be the same design and configuration except for the footrest on the A380. On the 777, your seat drops then extends out, and at 6’1″ I slept like a baby. I also really enjoyed the storage space/cut outs in the seat that also meant I had shoulder room. The A380 had a cubby hole for feet which probably helped keep rusty-sock smell from the cabin. But on the 777, it was hard to tell you weren’t lying completely flat. I’d also like to point out that I departed San Francisco at 5p and arrived in Dubai at 7p (next day) and did not feel jetlagged. I only preferred the A380 seat over the 777 because I didn’t have someone directly beside me.

Economy Class
Here’s where it can get painful.

The 777 was originally designed for 9 seats across the cabin, but Emirates has 10. So your butt and shoulders may be making contact with your seatmate for the next 13 hours. At least your knees and feet will be comfortable, as Emirates provides a few more inches of legroom. The A380 has standard seat width, but the legroom isn’t nearly as good as on the 777. In the row I tried out on the A380, the window felt a little more cramped. Both Economy cabins offer in seat video and universal and USB power ports, so even if you are stuck in the 777 in coach, you will still have plenty to keep you busy.

Here are some more pieces for comparison.

The Winner
Interestingly enough, I really enjoyed the 777 flight over the A380 flight. The A380 bar really stands out, but the service was much more consistent on the 777. The foot traffic on the A380 can (and does) stand out, so if you want to avoid it, then try to sit in the forward section of business class. Anyone who pays for Business Class (or upgrades) will not be disappointed. This airline does an amazing job and if I had the budget, I’d gladly fork out $12,000 for this type of service.

The 767s are complete, and the 747s are almost there. They say 18 out of 24 aircraft are done with the full 747 fleet being finished by October this year. But those 777s, well, they’ll continue to limp along with the old product. Here’s how things will look when the 747s are done in a couple months.

So what’s the excuse this time? Money. In an internal memo, they blame two things, but I’m not buying the first.

While our International Premium Travel Experience (IPTE) aircraft continue to double our customer satisfaction scores, and the modifications continue to progress well, the B777 program is more complex than the B767 and B747 programs, given the three different B777 sub-fleets. In addition,
we are facing a challenging year due to the global recession, changing market demand and increasing fuel prices.

Uh huh. This thing has been delayed so many times that I find it hard to believe that the complexity is still causing the problem here. Instead, I’ll put my bet on the little blurb that followed:

The decision to postpone the start of the work also allows us to better control our costs in 2009, helping us maintain a stronger cash flow through the historical trough period of the fourth quarter.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! They say you have to spend money to make money, but how does that work when you don’t have money to spend? Sadly, the 777s make up a bit more than half the fleet, so the cost savings here are likely to turn into revenue pain as people look toward other airlines with better options.

1) Upgrade and Standby lists on Delta.com and Soon, Mobile

Delta was the first that I can recall to invest in flat screen monitors to make all sorts of information available to the people waiting around at the gate. Included in that was the standby list. Did you make it on the earlier flight? Had they even cleared the list yet? What about the upgrade to First Class? The screen had all the info. It has taken them several years, but they’ve finally brought this functionality to the website.

Now when you’re flying, you can go online and make sure you’re on the standby/upgrade list. More importantly, you can see how many seats are available, and you can learn where you are on that list. Nice, huh?

This is only on the website right now, but they say it will be on the mobile version “shortly.” Then it will become much more valuable.

2) Wifi Progress

If you’re one of those people rejoicing at having wireless internet onboard, you’ll be happy to know that Delta has made some real progress. Just yesterday, they said 44 aircraft were outfitted, but this morning they said it was up to 59. As of today, 53 of the MD-88 aircraft (out of 113), 5 757s (out of 128), and the very first MD-90 (out of 16) have been outfitted with wireless internet. One more MD-88 and one MD-90 go in tonight.

If you include all 78 737s, all MD-88s, all MD-90s, and all 757s in the calcuation, that means that 17.6% of the domestic fleet is outfitted. Some of those 757s, however, are part of the international fleet, and some of the 767s are part of the domestic fleet, so it’s not exact. Of course, this doesn’t (and won’t) include regional aircraft.

Still, if you’re on an MD-88, you now have a 47% chance of getting a wireless-enabled aircraft. That’s very good, and it’s progressing quickly.

3) More Room for Crap on 757s

The rest of the updates weren’t exactly earth-shattering, but they’re still kind of interesting. And the blogger who wrote about them writes in pretty technical language, so I thought I could serve as a translator.

One update was on the “75E” aircraft. That’s actually just their internal code for the 757s that fly over the Atlantic. So what did they do? They added larger lav tanks. Apparently, people were cooped up a little too long on those 757s and they must have been running out of room in the lav tanks. Yuck. The modifications will be done on all the international 757s by June 1. Might want to avoid drinking too much water on those planes until then.

Other good news: they put headrests on the coach seats while this was going on.

4) More Business Class on 777-200LR

Delta’s longest haul aircraft, the 777-200LR, is slowly entering the fleet. The third aircraft was just delivered, and they’ve apparently found a way to squeeze in another two business class seats. So instead of 43, there will now be 45 onboard. The first two aircraft will be modified to have two more business class seats in the next couple months as well.

The NTSB has told Rolls-Royce that it needs to redesign the Fuel Oil Heat Exchanger (where cold fuel passes hot oil and they cool/warm each other to proper temperatures) to prevent ice accumulation and subsequent blockage of the the fuel lines. You may remember that the hot oil wasn’t properly warming the cold fuel and ice was forming. This has, so far, only been a problem on the Rolls-Royce Trent 800 engines, though Rolls believes that this could ultimately have a larger impact after further research is done on icing for long flights at very cold temperatures. But that’s another story.

Rolls is working on the fix already and expects to have it ready within a year. Once the redesign is complete, airlines will have no more than six months to implement the fix. So if this is so “urgent,” why aren’t the planes being grounded? Well, procedures have already been put into place to help avoid these types of incidents, but the NTSB doesn’t think that’s a good long term solution. In the NTSB’s words:

While the procedures may reduce the risk of a rollback in one or both engines due to [Fuel Oil Heat Exchanger] ice blockage, they add complexity to flight crew operations, and the level of risk reduction is not well established. And because the recovery procedure requires a descent, the aircraft may be exposed to other risks such as rising terrain or hazardous weather, or the inability to achieve maximum thrust during a critical phase of flight, such as during a missed approach.

So while the fix they’re using right now does work, it’s not satisfactory in the long term. So should we worry about stepping on a Rolls-Royce powered 777? I wouldn’t. But it is clear that there are problems and it’s good to see them being addressed sooner rather than later.

But that’s speculation. If anyone knows why this change is being done, please let me know. Assuming this information is accurate, it’s going to once again mean a painful transition for United customers in coach. I assume it’s a safe bet that they won’t dedicate certain configurations to a single route. (Though they’re trying to do it now, it’s far from a guarantee.) So while the change is happening, if you booked a B seat on one plane thinking you had an aisle, you might end up with a middle seat. On the other hand, if you booked a D seat thinking you have a middle, you might be rewarded with an aisle.

On top of all this, I think it’s safe to assume that the domestic 777 fleet which has no international premium product or in seat video, probably won’t change at all. If those are all isolated to the Hawai’i and domestic routes they’re intended to fly, it’s not a huge problem but it still adds to the confusion.

What’s the worst part of all this? There won’t be any material changes for coach passengers, as far as I can see. This won’t bring video on demand or anything like that into coach. It will simply be a costly infrastructure upgrade to allow for video on demand up front.

If anyone has further information about this, hit the comments.

[There is now an updated post with info that United will have on demand in coach.]

In short, here’s what they think happened:

The investigation has shown that the fuel flow to both engines was restricted; most probably due to ice within the fuel feed system. The ice is likely to have formed from water that occurred naturally in the fuel whilst the aircraft operated for a long period, with low fuel flows, in an unusually cold environment; although, G-YMMM was operated within the certified operational envelope at all times.

The interesting thing here is that they really aren’t sure what happened, but they’ve reached this conclusion through a process of elimination. Everything appeared to function as expected, but there was reduced fuel flow. What caused it? That’s where the speculation begins.

They do know that the aircraft was flying in unusually cold conditions but not cold enough to cause “fuel waxing” which is when fuel would freeze. They know that there is naturally-occurring water that builds up in fuel over time, and this would freeze at those temps, but they didn’t find anything excessive. What could have happened is that small bits of ice built up over time and were jarred into the unfortunate position of blocking the fuel flow. What would have jarred them?

Well, when the airplane was descending, it had to power up a couple times for holding and to speed up to remain lined up with the runway. This of course, happens all the time, but it was also just the type of event that could have knocked ice crystals into a bad spot. It sounds like it was truly an amazing coincidence that these events resulted in an aircraft landing short of the runway and being written off.

The AAIB examined 13,000 777 flights powered by Rolls-Royce engines and found the following:

• Of the 13,000 flights, only 118 had takeoff fuel temps below the 28 degrees F found on this flight
• On the approach, only 70 flights had fuel at or below the -8 degrees F found on this flight
• Only 10% of the flights examined had fuel flows of less than 10,000 pound of fuel per hour (pph) for the step climbs after departure (this flight never exceeded 8,896 pph)
• Only 10% of the flights examined had fuel flows of more than 10,000 pph during the approach phase (this one was more than 12,000 pph)

So as you can see, the combination of low fuel temps, low fuel flow early in the flight and high fuel flow toward the end may have doomed this aircraft. Had it happened in any other phase of flight, the ice would have disappeared quickly enough that it would have been easy to recover. This was, as usual, a series of things going wrong that combined to create a nasty accident.

The AAIB recommends requiring airlines use measures to reduce the risk of ice formation. This could include things like using fuel additives that lower the freezing point, but it didn’t actually specify what should happen as of yet, as far as I can tell. Initially these recommendations are only for Rolls-Royce powered aircraft, but they’re going to review other engines and aircraft types to see if it might be necessary elsewhere.

As I said above, this is really a fascinating read. I’d recommend taking it home with you this weekend.

Everyone got off ok, and that’s pretty amazing. I spent the day yesterday going back and forth with a bunch of airline dork friends discussing what could have possibly caused this to happen. The weather was good and there weren’t any visibility issues, so that’s unlikely to have been the problem. There were reports that the engines failed, so what would have caused it? Did it run out of fuel? Maybe, though unlikely. It didn’t catch on fire, so that’s always possible.

I know, I should really keep out of this whole speculation game. Remember that potential “undular bore” that the Air Canada plane may have hit? Well, there are now reports that it could have been wake turbulence from a 747 passing in front of it. Not nearly as interesting, but certainly plausible. So, it makes me want to reserve judgment on this accident even though it’s so interesting.

The Daily Mail, however, has no problem speculating that it may have been a bird strike that shut down both engines simultaneously just a minute before landing. They have a bunch of incredible pictures and more details on the site. The odds of that seem so unbelievably small. It made me wonder which was more unlikely: that scenario or Randy Johnson hitting a bird over home plate with his fastball a few years back.

Well, it doesn’t matter. They’ll figure it out soon enough, I’m sure. It’s interesting to note that this is the first major accident I can think of involving a 777. That’s a very long and impressive safety record.

But back to my original point. That plane is still sitting at the threshold to the runway, so it may cause delays. Right now, I believe the runway is open to departing flights. (“And please don’t look to your right, ladies and gentlemen.”) Yesterday, when the runway was closed, most short haul flights were canceled or diverted so that long hauls could run. I imagine that the runway may need to close on and off for investigation and removal, so short haul flights may be affected again.

I came across this video this morning which is a 3:35 piece of the PBS series “21st Century Jet” about the 777 showing what kind of testing they did on the 777 wing.

As you can see, they bent that wing up more than 24 feet from level and only then did it break, at more than 150% of the strongest force that could expected in flight.

And this isn’t the only wing testing they do. They also flex the wings up and down for long periods of time to simulate sustained periods of turbulence.