Revealed: Lufthansa’s New Premium Economy Seat

Flew Virgin Atlantic in PE 3x last year (including 11+ hrs overnight/red eyes for 2 of the 3 flights, plus 3rd aboard 8pm LHR-JFK) in its “conventional” recliner seat.

Also flew Virgin Atlantic JFK-LHR aboard 2-4-2 eight abreast Airbus A340 for overnight/red eye in 34” pitch extra legroom row seat.

Then flew China Airlines JFK-Taipei-JFK six months ago in PE aboard its densified Boeing 777-300ER, which have shell seats.

My partner flew Aeroflot Moscow-JFK in PE aboard its densified Boeing 777-300ER, which have shell seats in Oct 2017.

It’s NOT even close which seats we found more comfortable:

Virgin Atlantic’s PE seats far and away were more comfortable.

In fact, we liked China Airlines service a lot - but we’d probably like it even more but for the shell seats, which overall, were LESS comfortable than the window-aisle pair aboard Virgin Atlantic’s A340 in the 34” pitch extra legroom seats.

And while we’d happily take China Airlines again in PE because we liked everything else a lot, and because most of our other flights are on Delta (or SkyTeam member airlines), the PE conventional recliner seats aboard China Airlines’ hometown rival, EVA Air, sure do look so much more attractive for those 16 hrs slogs!

Too bad United is no longer our “preferred airline” - because the combination of SkyPesos and China Airlines’ service likely tips the scale in favor of it in the future even if its shell seats are decidedly inferior to EVA’s conventional recliners in PE.

But, I definitely understand why some airlines believe it better to install shell seats - why those in favor of shell seats because they don’t invade their space are as passionate about protecting the space they also pay more to have, as for sure, at 38” pitch, unless one is in the bulkhead row, as we were for our Virgin Atlantic flights (my partner had Polio and has reduced mobility typical of that disease; btw he found its ottoman/footstool practically life-changing when flying as those flights did NOT result in any post arrival pain flare-ups that can take a while to abate sometimes) so we didn’t have to worry about our space being invaded for those flights.

But, for sure, I made it a point to look at the rows behind us, and when fully reclined, PE seats at 38” pitch go back so far, that anyone seated in the window or middle seats, will have a difficult time getting up and out when they needed to use the loo or to stretch their legs as one should do for any flights longer than 3 or so hours.

And that’s the problem: 38” pitch simply is too little separation between rows to offer enough recline for sleeping and a footrest without almost being in the face of the person in the row behind.

And haters of the recliners are right to resent that they’re paying extra to also have additional space, and then seeing it taken away from them when the person ahead of them pushes the recline button!

So, as always, I’d place the blame square on the shoulders of the airlines, and their senior most executives who never, ever use the crappy/substandard products they sell (which of course makes clear through their actions that they KNOW how crappy it is since if they don’t bother using it, then they’re showing by their precious, better than the rest of us, derrières, that it’s not good enough for them to use as we do), whom have now been so successful at degrading economy cabins in recent years, that even if the shell seats suck bigly (and they sure do compared to conventional recliners), that the alternative for those poor unfortunate souls whose bank accounts don’t allow for all aisle access, living rooms/castles in the sky (aka private suites) but can step up to PE to escape the intentionally created miseries of misery class (for example, much narrower seats packed into 31” pitch, no legroom rows aboard Boeing’s hideous 9-abreast 787 & 10-abreast 777 densified beasts), is even worse - so the suckers, when facing a choice between 17” wide seats packed 10-abreast in 31” pitch no legroom rows on a densified 777, or an horrible and uncomfortable, but wider and 38” pitch shell seat in PE, will hold their noses and still pay for the vastly inferior to a recliner seat instead of the even worse ones in economy.

Of course, if the corrupt jerks were required to fly in the horrible seats they sell, things would likely change for the better for the rest of us real fast.

But, they aren’t required to fly the crappy seats they profit so handsomely from - so it’s a “win-win” for them!

Never ever flying the crap they sell, while also fattening the value of their stock options.

Meanwhile, for most others, it’s strictly a “lose-lose” proposition with dreadful shell seats in PE - or much worse in economy.

Based on what was observed on those three Virgin Atlantic flights, it probably requires at least 40” pitch to make its recliners work for those NOT seated in bulkhead rows.

And well, if Lufthansa did that, then they wouldn’t be able to rip-off PE passengers nearly as efficiently as 33% higher revenue per square meter in economy class or (amazingly!) 6% more than the pointy end of the plane as they’re doing now.

So, instead of the comfier space invading recliners for its future PE cabins at 38” pitch, they’re opting for the decidedly less pleasant and inferior shell seats instead of bumping pitch up to 40” (or slightly more).

Shocker!