Popular aircraft seat manufacturer Thompson Aero has unveiled a new business class seat. It’s quite innovative and has potential, though I’m not convinced the market for it is that huge, or that there aren’t also some drawbacks.
Continue reading: VantageDUO: Innovative New Narrow Body Business Class Seat
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
Looks like it’s geared toward newer airlines in Asia that are going to pick a seat off the shelf and not customize it much.
This seat also looks heavy in comparison to other similar seats so it could impact performance
Are these seats similar the ANA domestic premium class seat or the cradle seat?
I think JAL domestic first class seats (787 and a350) look similar. I wonder they are the same seats.
I wish somebody could do an innovative economy seat, that is simply as comfortable as the thick economy seats of the 1980s and 1990s were.
The new economy seats are little better than ironing boards. While the front of the plane has improved, I would argue many premium economy products are more similar to how I found international long haul economy was 30 years ago (and probably similar relative price in real terms too).
The danger is if all the premium seats sell out, as mainline economy seating now is much worse and is usually situated on narrower jets than the old quads.
The seat looks uncomfortably narrow but that could just be an optical illusion.
It does look interesting but yes, seat width and foot well size are the concerns.
This would be a game-changer. The domestic F class recliner seats are unacceptable on flights over 3 hours. The fact that NB's cross the US continent coast to coast with those awful recliner seats is a complete joke.
This type of seat would at the very least nudge more towards being acceptable. I would take this slightly narrow seat, for more comfort and recline. AA, UA and AS should really place an order now.
It's a pretty good product imo. As for complaints that it lacks direct aisle access for window seats there is clearly a limitation on what can be achieved in a narrow body/ single aisle jet using a 2-2 config.
If it's used in a regional J or ( US) Transcon setting then personally I could live with that lack of aisle access. I think it would bother me more on an intercontinental flight which I agree would present a possible limiting factor for take up as it's likely, at least partially, aimed at TATC flights on the 321XLR where airlines will either lean into the concept and hope pax aren't too bothered about it or will avoid it as a product precisely because research tells them the % margins for those who say they'd book elsewhere due to it were too narrow
I don't think it's quite true that domestic F pitch is 36-37". AS has 41" pitch in domestic F and there could very much be a market for these types of seats on many currently operated AS flights. AS operates a number of grueling 6 hr plus flights for which I could imagine these seats making a substantive, positive change.
I am a big fan of a zero gravity position and actually prefer it to full flat in most cases as I haven't found a layflat bed that is comfortable enough to sleep on my side, if I am going to have to sleep on my back, the zero gravity position is most comfortable for me. That being said, the jury is still out on this design as the lack of shoulder space, foot space, storage, and direct aisle access could doom this product.
As @Mark mentions in the first comment, it looks very heavy and potentially maintenance intense (though Thompson Aero has a solid reputation with its products). It's probably only an initial concept that will be reworked to suit the needs of prospective airline clients.
As for the affect of angled seating on width, an understandable concern, there are already angled hard-shell 2-2 seats flown on narrow bodies, specifically the B/E Aerospace (now Rockwell Collins) designed lie flat seats that are used on American Airline A321T transcon flights (and I think DL and UA, but I never fly them; and several international airlines), which are perfectly comfortable in terms of width - as it's specifically width that is being referenced in this article and comments, not the pitch.
Finally, re the zero-gravity design....anyone on the thread remember the old British Airways Club World cradle seats from at least 2 decades ago?? This design seems a narrow-body/short or mid-regional haul equivalent concept.
Happy travels!:)
I couldnt agree more ! I have been around long enough to remember the big thick Y class seats. Continental in particular was a comfortable ride in main cabin.
Exactly how does one exit the window seat- hold onto back of shell, weave thru the angles in pathway and step over the absolutely tiny model’s footrest? Good idea, but don’t see it working on any US airline.
The aisle passenger definitely will need to get up for the window passenger to get out. It's no worse than the conventional single aisle plane and may be more comfortable due to the recline and leg rest.
@ Raylan -- Totally fair point about Alaska, I updated the post to reflect that.
Man I second that notion too. Y seats should have at least 18" width mandated by law. Too much attention is focused on premium.
If you're half as flexible as that absolutely tiny model, it shouldn't be a problem!
Cathy’s fixed shell seats are very uncomfortable, since they lack near to no lumbar support.