All aircraft differ quite greatly in their internal layout, number of seats, and placement of emergency hatches.
But by mid-2014, the airline company intends to bring them to one type of cabin. Already 4 aircraft have a similar seat layout. Their tail numbers are: EIUNA, EIUNB, EIUND, EIUNF. Let's look at this diagram.
Ask an airline employee for advice
If possible, carefully study the diagram of the airliner you will fly on.
Do not take seats where the seats do not recline or are limited in their ability to do so.
Do not take places near toilets, kitchens and other technical rooms at the very end.
1 rub. Business places. Modern business, very comfortable chairs that recline to almost 180 degrees. Monitors located in the wall with a diagonal of 17.1 inches. Exquisite menu to choose from. In general, you will be very comfortable there.
10 rub. First row economy class. The advantage of these seats is the fact that no one will recline the back of the chair. Among the small disadvantages, we note that certain passengers are not very comfortable looking at the wall the entire flight. There are also mounts for cradles here, so it is possible to be close to babies.
16 rub. E,D,C and 17 rub. The backs of the chairs in these rows have limitations when reclining, because they rest against the wall and partitions of the kitchen. It is uncomfortable to be in a vertical position for the entire long flight. The distance between rows in economy class is 33 inches, which is approximately 83 centimeters.
18 rub. First row of tourist class. The stated distance between rows is 29-31 inches. This is about 74-78 centimeters. The advantages and disadvantages are similar to the 10th row. Another disadvantage is the proximity to toilets. People will always pass by you, they will stand “over your soul”, waiting for their turn. During the entire flight you will certainly be accompanied by the sounds of the tank and, probably, not very pleasant smells. Quite a busy place.
23 rub. H,G,B,A and 24 rub. F,E,D,C - seats in these rows are located close to the reserve exit. For safety reasons, so as not to block the approach to it, the backrests can be blocked or limited in reclining. The entire flight will need to be in the same position. This is inconvenient, given that these aircraft are used on long-distance routes.
24 rub. H,A. In front of them there is free space for legs, due to the emergency exit. But there is no armrest on the side of the hatch, and the door “sticks out” a little.
24 rub. G,B and 25 rub. F,E,D,C. Probably the most comfortable places given aircraft configuration. Quite far from toilets and other technical premises. Everything is the same as in standard places and has a huge advantage - due to the location of the emergency hatches, there is a lot of free leg space in front of them. These joys can be overshadowed by the fact that passengers of the following categories are prohibited from being in these places: with children, with animals, and the elderly. You cannot place hand luggage in the aisle; you will have to put everything in the closet upstairs.
Last row of tourist class. The backs are fixed. also adjacent to toilets. register for these series on the principle of hopelessness.
Couple general points regarding the arrangement of seats in the Boeing 767-300ER - their disadvantages and advantages.
1. The seats that are located next to the window have the advantage that you can look out of it during the flight (this, of course, depends on the flight time and weather). If you fly at night, this advantage does not count. Also, your neighbor will not bother you if he wants to get up. These places have one drawback - it is not very convenient to leave it yourself. Therefore, if you don’t need to go to the toilet often or you intend to sleep through the entire flight, choose seats by the window.
2. The seats located near the aisle have their own advantage - it is very easy to get up from if you need to go to the toilet. The disadvantages are that a neighbor may be disturbed if he needs to get up. Flight attendants with trolleys and passengers who walk through the cabin to the galley and toilets can also interfere. Therefore, if you are flying with a child and, most likely, you will have to go to the toilet often. Or you yourself need to go to the restroom more often, then choose from the edge of the seat.
Dear site users!
We hope that this article was useful to you.
If you have ever flown on an airline plane in your life, please share your feedback about the flight.
Clear skies to you, as the pilots say, and a soft landing!
01/21/2019 Alexey
I was supposed to fly to Jordan on a 777, it broke down and I had to fly on a replacement 767 ikar - departure from Sheremetyevo. I liked everything, but it felt like the plane was far from new and the distance between the seats was a bit tight, my height is 186... thank God the flight is 4 hours. In most cases, all bumps and other troubles are caused by the weather and the ability to fly the plane. The new 737s also shake... Therefore, blaming aircraft is a thankless task. The 767 is a workhorse with plenty of traction. For comfort, I liked the 777-200 and 777-300 more. People, you better think about the fact that you need to wear compression socks during the flight, drink more water and move - believe me, there are problems in the air that are worse than all sorts of bumps about which there is so much talk on the forums - shocked here, shocked here. The bottom line is - I was training to be a pilot, the 767 is a beast, but not very comfortable, this is a question for the government, which should have long ago come up with normal laws to control the distance between seats - this is not the fault of the plane itself and its developers. I don’t quite understand the point of reviews about a Boeing 767 aircraft - reviews should be written about an aircraft in such and such a company, and not just about the aircraft. Have a comfortable flight.
Is the review helpful? 8 / 1
10.26.2018 Igor
I flew several times on Boeing 767-300 aircraft with a 2-4-2 formation. Well, this is a real cattle carrier at rush hour. I really just wonder where the government is looking?!!! And how much can you mock people by lining up planes like this!!! soon they will install handrails and they will fly standing up!!! It would be nice if it were for short flights (up to 4 hours), that’s how they install such planes with a flight duration of 8 hours or longer!!! All these airlines like Azur Air, Pegasus, Nord Wind, etc. At least they have gained a conscience!!! Even in the former Soviet republics they don’t think of such a thing, but ours, as always, are ahead of the rest!!!
Is the review helpful? 31 / 8
07/15/2018 Murat
In 2017, I flew on this plane from Astana to Frankfurt on the Main with Air Astana. Very comfortable, seating arrangement 2+3+2. Everyone has their own monitor with a collection of films and entertainment programs. The salon is new and clean, the toilet in the toilet flushes very interestingly. It is not a blue liquid as before, but is sucked in by air. The 6 hour flight went by unnoticed.
Is the review helpful? 11 / 3
06/01/2018 Guest
The last time I flew on this plane was in the summer of 2015, from Moscow to Simferopol with Transaero airline. The distance between the seats was very tight, it is obvious that the plane was specially converted for short flights, the seat layout is 2+4+2, and the distance between the seats is very small. The flight itself went perfectly, there was never a jolt, the landing in Simferopol also went smoothly
Is the review helpful? 9 / 2
04/29/2018 Sergey
We flew to Sharm al-Sheikh the other day from Kyiv (azurair)
A beast of course.
Despite its size, it takes off like a racing car on takeoff.
In the air he behaves confidently.
The salon pleased us with its spaciousness.
The landing was a bit rough, but I don’t think it was the plane.
Actually really cool.
Is the review helpful? 11 / 8
02/23/2018 Sasha Sim, Kyiv
For the first time we were allowed on a short 3-hour (with a tail) chartered flight: Kyiv (Borispol) - Sharm El-Sheikh. It turns out that our airline Azur Air Ukraine also has such airliners and, together with its partner Anex Tour, organize short-distance flights to resorts in Egypt.
The aircraft cabin is large. It's nice to fly in this. The chairs are normal. Five monitors show only an animation of the plane's route. It is sometimes interesting to look at where we are: above Odessa or already above Cairo. And you can see these and other cities through the porthole. It turns out to be an interesting connection between animation and reality. If you, like me, are sitting at the porthole. The take-off was almost imperceptible and short, it seemed to me that it was possible that I was constantly taking photographs. But the landing was terrible! It was throwing up and down and from side to side - in Egypt there are strong winds in winter and this was the reason. The turbulence during the flight was mild. (More details on the website www.facebook.com/sashasim.egipet/ ...- Facebook “Holidays in Egypt”)
Is the review helpful? 6 / 3
02/08/2018 VLVF
I flew with Pegasus to Phuket and back. The 2-4-2 configuration is clearly not for long-distance flights. During two 10-hour night flights I could not fall asleep even once - very uncomfortable, just terribly.
Is the review helpful? 33 / 2
12/11/2017 Guest
An ordinary plane, nothing special.
Is the review helpful? 5 / 19
10/17/2017 Guest
We flew with the AZUR air company from St. Petersburg to Punta Cana on 10/04/2017. row 12 (D,E). The flight was 11 hours, the backs of the seats in our row did not recline. The distance from my head to the passenger in front is 15 cm.
Even very average passengers (with a height of 170 cm and above) experience great inconvenience, their knees rest against the seat in front. In a small empty space - a passage between the toilets - a " kindergarten" - there was a blanket spread on the floor on which little children were playing. Passengers and even the flight attendants took this calmly, because they understood that while sitting in their seats, the parents could not pick up the children - there was no room.
With the ship fully loaded, 300 passengers are actually increased by 36, i.e. 4.5 rows are added.
I would not be surprised if in the near future they will deliver several more rows, railings and carry passengers like in a tram....
Is the review helpful? 54 / 2
09/18/2017 Nikita
The plane is wonderful, although not new. We flew from Seoul, takeoff, flight, landing, everything was 5+! We were fed during the flight and the toilets were working. What I remember most was one sociable passenger who transformed the cabin of the plane to suit herself, I’ve never seen anything like this before))) filmed -youtu.be/0DaGiSqItd4
Is the review helpful? 20 / 8
08/17/2017 Artyom
Flew this year - the airline belongs to PegasFly. The pegasus himself was amazing, well, that’s how it always is with them. The planes themselves are normal, well cleaned. The first flight was on a 777. And the return flight was on a 767-300ER. The flight was smooth, maybe it was the skill of the crew, but still... True, we should return to 777, but we had to go to 767-300ER, I thought it would be bad, I was wrong. Slept for half the flight (4 hours) From Jordan to Moscow. I didn’t fall asleep at all on the 777, the air on the runway was very cool, I was thinking right now what it would be like on a rocket, and it’s true... the angle of takeoff was extraordinary. Maybe the weather, maybe mistakes. They took off and did well. Although why did I write about the 777 if there is a 767-300 (ER) ... but oh well)
Is the review helpful? 6 / 32
07/30/2017 Olga
A very good plane, I flew with my mother to Greece, I really liked the landing and takeoff, it’s soft, so if someone doesn’t like it, they don’t have to fly at all!
Is the review helpful? 8 / 25
07/17/2017 Guest
I can’t say anything about this, but Ikarovsky 767-300, how old is it anyway? The route chosen is so bad that turbulence is normal for 5.20-5.30 hours of flight out of 8 - is this normal?? The clear sky is shaking, so change the flight level, no, they will fly, I am studying to be a civil aviation pilot, but I have rarely seen such an attitude towards people and the crew itself!!! Thank you for bringing us at least, future fellow pilots, I understand that the flight is needed, but not on such air routes, and I understand that without this it’s impossible (it’s a mess), but when you are not allowed or for economic reasons you can’t do it, it’s disgusting!!! The PIC makes decisions in the air and on board, not ground managers who poke their numbers on a calculator!
Is the review helpful? 17 / 24
05/18/2017 Galina
We flew from Moscow to Vietnam. The penultimate row in the tail section. Being 160 tall, my knees rested on the neighbor’s chair. The table did not recline completely due to the lack of space between the seats. The seat did not recline, during a flight of 11 hours. Constantly crowded near the toilet, endless trips carts with food that touched the passengers. There are 4 seats in the middle row, the outer ones have non-reclining armrests. Each time I had to stand in the narrow aisle between the rows to let out the passengers sitting in the center of the middle row. Not a flight, but 11 hours of torment. The flight seemed like an eternity.
Is the review helpful? 45 / 7
01/27/2017 Kirill
I flew to Phuket in December 2016 on such a plane, 7 hours from Krasnoyarsk, economy class, I got off the plane when we landed, I wasn’t even tired, the seat layout was 2-4-2, I didn’t notice any inconveniences, there was more than enough space, so who’s here? writes that there are inconveniences, etc. then either reset excess weight, or fly with other airlines, and don’t give a shit that this is a bad plane, apparently you haven’t flown on bad ones yet..
Is the review helpful? 31 / 25
06/05/2016 Guest
06/05/2016. Flight S7-1024. Sochi-Moscow at 16:40. Everything is on schedule. Board - VP-BVH; 767-33AER.
The plane is in excellent condition. Both externally and internally. The smell in the cabin is fresh. The toilets don't smell.
Excellent step between the chairs. Everything is neat and clean. S7 - well done.
The PIC spoke with the cabin, but did not introduce himself. The takeoff is very fast, the thrust of the engines is insane. We got to the echelon quickly enough. The PIC told us what cities we were flying through, what altitude we were flying at, etc. There was a little chatter at Domodedovo, there were a lot of clouds. Landing at 5, the PIC came in on his hands.
Overall great! Thank you very much S7!
Is the review helpful? 33 / 5
05/14/2016 Roman
Hello. The 767 is a very good plane, yes, I agree that in the low-cost airline it has small seats and a small pitch, but what do you want from the low-cost airline? I, as a 767 pilot, declare that for the crew this type is good. The plane obeys controls well. (Some " smart people"they said that it was chattering in the zone of strong! turbulence... Dear, any plane will chatter (777,747 and even 380 chatter). I won’t say anything about landing with “jerks” at all... If the plane was jerking or pitching, then most likely there is a problem in the weather, not in the sun).
X Thank you.
Is the review helpful? 75 / 7
05/06/2016 Leonid
Flighted by American Airlines in a normal 2-3-2 configuration. The flight is over 7 hours and with comfortable seating and movement around the cabin - no problems. So the plane is excellent, and the airlines create “comfort” for their own purposes. The inconvenience was the excessive operation of the air conditioners - Americans love the cold and we even had to wear a jacket. As you can see, the problems are opposite.
Is the review helpful? 14 / 3
05/03/2016 Guest
767-300 - flew in April 2016. to Vietnam. Layout 2-4-2. This is not an airplane, this is some kind of cattle truck. There are so many seats crammed into the cabin that a normal Vietnamese would not fit in. And what can we say for the Russians? We write and write, cuss and swear, but there’s no point. There is a chic recipe that has been tested millions of times in different countries and eras - the government of the Russian Federation, let foreign airlines enter the market and all these Pegasi with their livestock carriers will shrink. And so... chatter! Monopoly is death to everything living and real. I can't wait for this in my lifetime. I will fly with foreign airlines whenever possible. And the domestic manufacturer, who thinks about us...(how to rip more off these sheep), let him go...his own way. And what stars? Spaces must be included.
Is the review helpful? 79 / 17
04/01/2016 Elizaveta
Great plane! I don’t understand why they hate him so much! They flew from Moscow to Sharm, everything was fine, the seats were conveniently located. You can go to the toilet without jostling and disturbing anyone. I recommend!
Is the review helpful? 8 / 16
12/28/2015 Passenger
767-300 completely sucks, 2-4-2 layout which is not advertised, passage only for trolley passage, flight delay of 36 (Thirty-six!) hours due to a technical malfunction flight 2470 Phuket-Chelyabinsk from the operator NordWind dated December 25, 2015, The people waiting for our arrival were deprived of a couple of days of rest out of 11 paid for. I wish this barn with wings a worthy place in the dustbin of history.
Is the review helpful? 38 / 33
Transaero 767-300 in 2-4-2 configuration is complete disgusting. The space is terrible, the width of the seats is small, you sit almost on your neighbor’s lap, it’s impossible to eat, your elbows are like the paws of a praying mantis, they rest on your knees, those sitting next to you rest on their shoulders, you can’t stretch your legs. I flew on it for 8 hours. No entertainment program- no music, nothing. On TV for eight hours they showed an animation of the flight route and showed how Tsar Peter the Arap got married. The flight from Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky to Moscow-Domodedovo was such a disgrace! The website does not show this configuration. In general, this is an excellent plane for guest workers flying around Russia. This plane also needs to remove the luggage compartment and put Uzbeks there, add intermediate landings in Russia and it will be a miracle flight of business workers.
Is the review helpful? 56 / 18
05/27/2015 Tsai simply
To Burgas 11.05, back 25.05.. By Siberians S7. Aircraft B 767-300. Excellent and that's all. Wonderful liners. I have a huge height. 168 cm. Nothing got in the way. 2-3-2. You can dance all 2.15 minutes. flight between the seats and in the aisles.. A gorgeous plane. I have one question for the captain “who was taking us there.” When contacting the passengers during takeoff from Domodedovo, he introduced himself to us as the crew commander, without telling us his name. And we applaud . And when landing in Burgas, people applauded. And we didn’t know the name of our wonderful Captain. But I remember the last name of the crew commander of the AN-24 flight Chardzhou-Tashauz. In 1975, carried out by the Chardzhou air squad, the Turkmen Civil Aviation Administration.. The last name of this Captain is POOR. Until the end of my life I will remember the name of my former COMMANDER. I also want to know and remember the Siberian Captains.
Is the review helpful? 11 / 41
05/22/2015 Guest Igor
In May I flew to Egypt on a B767-300. At 1.68 my knees rested on the front seat.
Is the review helpful? 32 / 7
03/24/2015 Vatokatov
Flew Novosibirsk-Bangkok-Novosibirsk, B767-300, "Transaero"... salon 2-4-2, before that I flew on the same route on a B767 from the "Sibir" airline 2-3-2, this is normal layout for this plane, and not child seats from Transaero. I immediately remembered the cartoon where a greedy gentleman wanted to sew first two hats from a skin, then three... in the end he agreed on seven), accordingly, he received seven hats, the size of a thimble )).. "Transaero" could simply put handrails in the cabin so that you can fly standing and have something to hold on to and cram in three times more people.
Is the review helpful? 49 / 2
02/08/2015 Igor 02/28/2015
We flew from Khabarovsk to Bangkok on vacation and back to them. The impression was terrible. We flew for 8 hours. Packed with people like sardines in a barrel. Charter flight - Pegasus tourist. Never set foot in this airplane again. There weren’t enough blankets for everyone. Headphones were not distributed. They would turn on the air conditioner, then turn it off, it’s not clear how. It’s stuffy in the cabin. My button to call the conductors did not work. The light bulbs in the cabin lived their own lives, blinking when they wanted, that is, the plane with faulty electrical wiring was sent off.
Is the review helpful? 33 / 10
10/07/2014 Evgeniy
Cool plane! I flew on it from Bangkok to Tashkent. 6 hours flew by practically unnoticed. Comfortable chairs with room to put your feet. Entertainment in every seat. You can listen to music, watch movies, play games. The assortment is small, of course, but enough for 6 hours. Flew Uzbekistan Airways. The plane is not old, the flight itself was also normal. Overall satisfied!
Is the review helpful? 13 / 12
08/10/2014 Guest
"Flight Blagoveshchensk-Moscow, 767-300, almost 8 hours (07.08.14) Aeroflot, lineup 2-4-2, like herrings in a barrel"
It’s not surprising, this is a charter flight from Russia, there isn’t even a business lounge there. Aeroflot only sells tickets for this flight under the code SU, but in fact Russia is lucky
Is the review helpful? 16 / 8
04/20/2014 Alexey
Although I’m not a frequent flyer, I had the opportunity to fly one to Egypt with Transaero in a 2-4-2 configuration. If I had known that this was such a pain, I would have taken a tour from other operators.
An airplane for people up to 160 tall and weighing up to 50 kg, if such people fly long distances for more than 5 hours, then this is a mockery of people. 737-300 737-800 which I flew before is much more comfortable
Is the review helpful? 25 / 7
02/11/2014 Ekaterina
On February 6th we arrived from Bongkok, flew back and forth on this plane, no complaints, the only thing that was most depressing was that there was nowhere to put our legs, really, very, very cramped. It feels like they filled more seats than they should have.
Is the review helpful? 25 / 6
01/22/2014 Guest
Flew both 767 S7s New Year. Great plane. Take-off, flight and landing flawlessly. The flight lasted 8 hours. The only negative is the damn economy. Well, I’ll tell you this everywhere. Take a business and you will be happy.
Is the review helpful? 18 / 10
12/15/2013 Guest
I was flying on a Transaero flight to Moscow, board EI-UNA, charter option, seats in the economy cabin 2-4-2, I was sitting by the window, at first I didn’t understand why it was so cramped and the seat was a little narrower than usual, and then looking into the middle I saw that there are four seats... It's just a bummer, driving such a board over long distances is simply a mockery of passengers, the distance between the seats was normal for a height of 180 cm. I flew back on EI-UNE, a good cabin, 2-3-2 seats as usual, the flight was overnight, I slept well, the seat was comfortable.
Is the review helpful? 15 / 4
11/21/2013 Vladimir
I have been flying for a long time and a lot, since I have lived in Magadan for 50 years, of all the Boeing 767-300 aircraft, the most comfortable, reliable and the best, you fly and relax, the time in flight passes unnoticed! May God grant health to the one who created this airliner, and to all passengers who fly on any type of aircraft have wonderful takeoffs and landings!
Is the review helpful? 34 / 8
11/19/2013 Guest
I flew from Moscow to Yakutsk with Aeroflot and Transaero, Aeroflot’s car is newer, cleaner, the seats are more comfortable, but the service and food are no good, Transov’s service is better, they flew 2 times and better. The plane is class, for me, being 2 meters tall, it was comfortable from the flight I wasn’t tired, the AFL flight attendants were aged and tired, the Transov had young girls, I flew the same route on the AFL IL-96, the 767 is more comfortable and there is more space between the seats, and besides, the 96 does not have a luggage rack above the middle rows. The child is 1.2 months old. .they didn’t give anything in the AFL. Good luck to everyone.
Is the review helpful? 3 / 2
10/30/2013 supermax54
The best seats in the Boeing 767 airline s7:
We are talking here specifically about the VQ-BBI board. this is one of two 767 near Siberia)
rows of economy from 6 to 10 inclusive next to the business, separated from the rest of the economy by a partition.
All of these rows, including row 8, have portholes. take it if you have time))
Row 11 is right behind the partition, there is a little less legroom but no one is hanging over, there is more space.
row 27 is wide, opposite the emergency exits! but - without portholes at all, a small peephole doesn’t count))
accordingly, row 26 - the backrests do not go down, the worst row on the plane)
On the last row the backrests are lowered, don’t be afraid.
the wing obscures the view from row 15 to approximately 27.
Happy flying everyone, C7 is a good airline))
Is the review helpful? 49 / 0
10/18/2013 AGRESSOR
The first time we flew long-haul. Flight RnD - Bangkok. The plane belongs to Northern Wind Airlines. The car is quite decent: take-off - 5, at flight level (although we went through the “turbo” four times) - 5, landing - 5. Naturally, this is the passenger’s opinion. There is a feeling of confidence in the car, although more depends on the crews. GOD take care of all those in heaven!
Is the review helpful? 16 / 5
07/10/2013 Guest
We flew on this plane Novosibirsk-Barcelona-Novosibirsk 06/25/2013-07/08/2013. It’s a bit cramped, there’s not enough space between the seats, and it’s very uncomfortable for people of heavy build to fly for 8 hours. But the rest is great. From Barcelona we flew at the very tail, in the last row, there wasn’t even much shaking. The NordWind company, the entire crew - flight attendants and captain Igor Kolmogorov - are great. Very soft landing in Novosibirsk.
Is the review helpful? 1 / 0
07/04/2013 Guest
I flew with Aeroflot to Kamchatka. The car is what you need. The travel bag easily fits both on the luggage rack and under the chair. Your legs practically don’t get tired, you can even stretch them out a little. But there were no monitors :(
Is the review helpful? 1 / 1
06/20/2013 Guest
The plane is good, most importantly reliable. There is one question, flying from Blagoveshchensk to Moscow on the 2-4-2 option is very difficult, it’s just really inconvenient. I looked at the Transaero website, there are 11 767-300 aircraft and the cabin layout of each, but there are no 2-4-2 cabins in any of the 11 aircraft. Then where did this come from? We flew back from Moscow in a 2-3-2 configuration, very comfortable, the flight went well, we landed in Blagoveshchensk perfectly /PIC Vinogradov/. Many thanks to the pilots and cabin crew.
Is the review helpful? 4 / 1
04/22/2013 Guest
We flew from St. Petersburg to Phuket, North Wind airline. Everything worked out fine, although on the way back the onboard conductors turned out to be sleepy and ineffective. And the lack of blankets made me tense. When you sit at the porthole and it’s -60 outside the window for 10 hours, it’s terrible.
Is the review helpful? 0 / 9
04/07/2013 Guest
Flew Boeing 767-300 ER S7 Airlines (if you have another option, it’s better not Siberia) Khabarovsk-Bangkok and back January 2013, business class. The planes are old, the seats do not recline horizontally, and it is very uncomfortable to sleep. There is no entertainment (not even music on headphones, not to mention movies). Food and service are good. In economy class there were no windows in row 8, and in both planes.
Tickets were purchased in advance, at an improved economy class rate, so they cost 5 thousand more than a simple economy class. It’s nice that no time was wasted on registration (there is a separate counter in Bangkok) and we were the first to receive our suitcases.
Is the review helpful? 4 / 8
03/31/2013 Guest
We flew in March from Ekaterinburg to Phuket with Transaero, the 2-4-2 seat layout is something, I just want to ask: when will Russians stop mocking Russians? Not only is there obviously not enough space, but the chairs are simply tiny, with blank side armrests. I was flying with my wife in a two-seat row and my hip was constantly resting against her, and this was for 9 hours, and imagine if there was a stranger, I’m already silent about the 4-row seats. And all this taking into account the fact that I am not the largest in size, but next to me there was a tall man and 130 kilograms, so he had to look for a place separately!!! We flew back with a 2-3-2 configuration and this is a completely different comfort with different seats, by the way there is a good row 27 along the edges at the emergency exit X P.S. There are no complaints about the service, I even feel sorry for the female flight attendants because they also have to work in these narrow aisles
Is the review helpful? 4 / 0
03/12/2013 Guest
arrived yesterday Barbados Stockholm 9 hour flight seat 20b. I don’t like the USA, but the plane is good.
Is the review helpful? 2 / 7
10/07/2012 Guest
I flew with Transaero. Great plane, great service. The only plane in which I (height 186) felt VERY comfortable. There is room to place your legs, stretch out, TV, music - I recommend it!
Is the review helpful? 1 / 4
05.09.2012 Guest
We flew on a B767 in August. Flight Irkutsk-Sharm El-Sheikh via Krasnoyarsk a/k North Wind. The size of the engines immediately inspires peace of mind. During the flight, it shook less than on the A320 and B737, and the wing flutters less in turbulence. Convenience has already been mentioned, so with my height of 192 cm, I sat “diagonally” for 8 hours. Those who want comfort should take row 31 near the emergency exits; by the way, the 2-4-2 layout begins with this row. For those who like to admire the beauty of the earth - from about 22 to 30 rows of seats above the wing - there are no landscapes to be seen. What’s curious is that when we flew half empty from Krasnoyarsk to Irkutsk, the plane shook almost all the time, but it was tolerable.
Is the review helpful? 2 / 0
02.09.2012 Guest
We flew with this Boeing airline "Russia" combined with Aeroflot. There they took off sharply and quickly from a deep hole, it was breathtaking, people gasped in unison, and back they took off smoothly. I wonder if it depends on the pilot's character or professionalism. The Boeings of the "Russia" airline are clearly "grown-up", even unpleasant, the dirt between the seats has dried tightly from time to time, the seats are shabby... The crew is ordinary, everything is within limits. It didn't shake much.
Is the review helpful? 1 / 0
04/14/2010 Guest
I flew AEROFLOTOVSKY 767 300, an excellent plane and everything else was super. Cannot be compared with Transaero
Is the review helpful? 1 / 3
13.04.2010 Guest from Stavropol
I often fly on the Moscow - Khabarovsk route on a B-767-300 (although sometimes they fly Il-96)
As a passenger in this type of aircraft, I’m happy with everything (at Aeroflot)
comfortable seats, distances between seats, monitors, moderate engine noise
food is good (2 times), blankets, pillows, headphones, interior is not cramped
after an 8 hour flight there is no fatigue, the flight is a pleasure
a special word to the crew - always at their best, there were no problems
Is the review helpful? 2 / 1
04/03/2010 Guest
Great plane! Takeoff and landing are just super, of course the pilots are also Transaero aces, the only problem is the wear and tear of the aircraft, and I recommend this car to everyone!
Is the review helpful? 0 / 1
03/26/2010 GuestS.P
Last year I flew 767 AFL twice on different planes. Quite comfortable, clean, quiet. Landing and takeoff were good. We landed in Moscow in bad weather and sat down softly. Of course, it all depends on the pilots and the weather. Otherwise it’s quite comfortable. There is enough space between the seats. Large boxes for hand luggage, clean interiors. It is clear that the cabins are looked after. An eight-hour flight is easily tolerated. The layout is 2-3-2. Transaero has 2-4-2 they say very closely. IL86 is bigger of course
Is the review helpful? 0 / 0
03/17/2010 Ilya
The plane is not bad, but it has one big drawback: there is very little space, there is nowhere to stretch your legs, the back almost does not recline! Sit big man not possible, between the armrests, butt size 54 is not included!
Is the review helpful? 0 / 0
03/09/2010 Guest
We flew on March 7, 2010 on flight UN 428 Phuket - St. Petersburg on a Boeing 767-300 (1) of Transaero. Flight time 11 hours. The distance between the seats in economy class is 19.5 cm - you have to sit in this gap for all 11 hours! Specific places - 35G and 35F. A neighbor's attempt to stick his legs into the passage ended sadly - he ended up under a cart with Dyutikov's rubbish. Option one - stand at the toilets at the back of the plane most flight. Thus, Trans has introduced standing seats on their flights and charges full price for them.
Is the review helpful? 5 / 1
02/26/2010 Alexander
Guest dated 02/12/2010, I hasten to inform you ("noodles" are completely inappropriate here) that as recently as 02/22/2010 I had the pleasure of flying on flight UN-104 UUS-DME on the B767-200 EI-DBW. Location 22H, near the emergency hatch. It blew ungodly. No blankets or outerwear of our own could save us. The last time I encountered a similar phenomenon was on Tu-154 85610 ("barn", place - near the rear front door in the middle of the cabin). Who and what forgot to “close” in these cases - it’s hard not to appreciate your sarcasm - the average passenger is not very interested. Although it is obvious that in both cases (Boeing was 23 years old and Tu-154 was almost the same age) age and insufficient sealing of doors and hatches are taking their toll. On new or not very old cars, this does not manifest itself so painfully (9 hours under the blowing of cold air streams at best causes discomfort, and at worst - sniffles and something more interesting). So everything requires care and respect for age. Although they often save on this, regardless of the sound of the historical surname.
In general, I like the 767: it’s neither narrow nor wide, 2-3-2 is good, the shelves don’t crush like in the 777, and they are quite enough for a normal passenger, and not for a bag hog. The very fact that 767s have worked great for over 20 years speaks for itself. The car is comfortable, solid, reliable. And 2-4-2 is a configuration only for cheap charters, but not for regular flights with standard fares. No matter how proud Russia is of its 767s, flying the LED-KHV in such conditions is humiliating. Especially compared to the 767 and A330 of other airlines flying to the East (Petersburgers are clearly unable to compete with Vladivostok-Avia).
Is the review helpful? 4 / 1
02/09/2010 Danil
I regularly fly on these planes on the Anadyr-Moscow route and back. Flight time is 8 hours. Airlines "Transaero". The last time I flew was in August 2009. I don’t know how many years this plane has been flying, but it feels like they are about 40 years old. All the inscriptions are in English and Arabic. Apparently it came from some Arab airline. Not a single door in the toilet closes. I sat in the 3rd row of economy class, the distance between the seats was so narrow that I had to sit for the entire eight hours with my knees exposed to the aisle, the window rattled all the time and there was a draft coming out of it. Overall a nightmare. Cattle truck!
Is the review helpful? 4 / 1
01/27/2010 Murys
I constantly fly on a Boeing 767-300 with Aeroflot Los Angeles-Moscow-Los Angeles (SU321/322). The planes are excellent: spacious, clean, comfortable seats. The flight is great: the variety of films and audio recordings is pleasing. Easy takeoff and soft landing, even not discussed! Thanks to Boeing for such planes, and to our dear Aeroflot for such a flight!
Is the review helpful? 0 / 2
01/13/2010 Guestsandro
We flew by AEROFLOT from Moscow, 01/10/10. The flight was delayed for two hours. The plane is not new, but in decent condition, although the TVs did not work very well. But the staff, or crew, was at the highest level. I flew with AEROFLOT for the third time and the professionalism of the crew always brightened up minor troubles that can happen during the flight.
Is the review helpful? 0 / 1
01/10/2010 Rommel-KHB
We flew to Moscow during the New Year holidays with Aeroflot. The flight there was delayed for 6 hours, back to Khabarovsk for an hour. On the plane - quite comfortable, flies well, in general I like Aeroflot pilots. What I didn’t like - it’s clear from the cabin that the plane is old - the upholstery material on the seats is all cracked, the televisions in the cabin are apparently still tube-based, with impaired color rendition - for example, in the first cabin the central TV shows more or less normally, the next one in the cabin has The background is always red, and the third one is green. On a flight to Moscow, the headphone jack in my seat did not work; I had to connect them in my wife’s seat. During the flight back, the air conditioning system worked strongly in the first cabin; a fairly strong flow of air constantly blew on the passengers. I saw several passengers ask the stewards to reduce the flow, to which they received the answer that it was central system and they can't do anything. When we flew to Moscow, we were in the second cabin; there was no such nonsense with air conditioning. So if you fly on the A. Pushkin, I recommend the second cabin :) Well, or take seats in the center, it’s not so windy there.
And also, for those who fly through Terminal D of Sheremetyevo, don’t repeat our mistake, don’t expect to eat normally after passing the inspection - there are only 2 cafes, one has an insane price tag and a lot of people. And in the second cafe there was a shift change that lasted almost forty minutes.
Is the review helpful? 1 / 0
06.11.2009 Guest
An excellent plane, I flew in Siberia from Moscow to Irkutsk for 5 hours, everything was fine. The distance between the seats and the height of the seats are good (unlike the a-310, also Siberia, which is sometimes installed instead of the b-767)
Boeing 767 is a wide-body long-range aircraft manufactured by the American company Boeing. It is one of the most common airliners on transatlantic flights. The Boeing 767 began commercial operation in 1982, and since then more than a thousand aircraft have been sold.
Story
In 1970, the Boeing 747 wide-body airliner entered commercial service. It was the first double-decker passenger aircraft in history capable of carrying a large number of long-distance passengers. It is worth noting that the cabin of the aircraft is quite wide, so for the convenience of passengers and optimal work of staff, it was equipped with two aisles.
A couple of years later, Boeing began researching a new long-haul airliner project under code name 7X7. It was supposed to replace the aging Boeing 707, and would also have a two-aisle cabin, but in a narrower fuselage than the 747.
The original 7X7 concept envisioned a high-capacity, short-haul aircraft capable of taking off and landing on short runways. However, the airlines were not interested in this option. After which, Boeing refocused the project on creating a transcontinental airliner. During this period, several aircraft configurations were proposed: with two engines, with three engines and a T-tail fin.
Ultimately, the base configuration was a twin-engine variant similar to the Airbus A300. This choice was associated with economic considerations, as well as with the technical progress of new generation jet engines.
Boeing expected the 7X7 to fill the mid-capacity, long-haul segment of the market. In other words, the liner must transport a large number of passengers between major cities.
New technologies
By the end of the 1970s, aerospace technology had advanced greatly and the new aircraft featured the most advanced of them. In addition to the above-mentioned new generation engines, the airliner received more efficient aerodynamic solutions; part of the fuselage was made of composite materials. All this made it possible to lighten the weight of the liner, reduce fuel consumption and take on board as many passengers as possible.
The same technologies were applied to the 7N7 project, which later turned into one of the most successful aircraft - the Boeing 757. The cockpits of both airliners were unified, which made it possible to train the crew to fly two types at once, and this in turn reduced the costs of airlines for retraining crews.
The similarity between the 767 and 757 cockpits was that for the first time in history, some of the analogue electromechanical dial indicators were replaced by cathode ray tube displays. The crew was reduced to 2 people, and the functions of the navigator were perfectly handled by the Flight Management System (FMS), which, in addition, had a lot of capabilities. Since then, cabins with similar equipment are called “glass” or “glass cockpit”.
Start of Boeing 767 production
In January 1978, Boeing announced an expansion of the Everett plant, which had been built in the late 1960s specifically to produce the 747. The new aircraft, by then designated the 767, was expected to be produced there.
Boeing planned to produce three modifications: 767-100 (capacity 190 passengers), 767-200 (capacity 210 passengers) and the three-engine 767 MR/LR (capacity 200 passengers). Subsequently, the 767 MR/LR was renamed the 777, became a twin-engine airliner, and its capacity was increased to 440 passengers.
Production of the first 767 began on July 14, 1978, after United Airlines ordered 30 767-200 aircraft. After some time, an order was received for 50 767-200 aircraft from American Airlines and Delta Airlines.
As for the 767-100 modification, it turned out to be of no interest to airlines, since its characteristics overlapped with the Boeing 757.
The most important thing is operating costs
By the late 1970s, minimum operating costs had become the main criterion for airlines purchasing aircraft. Boeing anticipated this, which is why fuel efficiency was built into the 767 during the design process. Compared to its predecessors, the aircraft was 20-30% more economical. Engineers were able to achieve such results due to new technologies in wing design, as well as new engines. At the same time, technological advances have made it possible to design one third of the 767's blueprints using computers, and the test mock-up of the airliner spent about 26,000 hours in the wind tunnel.
Boeing simultaneously designed two aircraft, the 767 and 757. Ultimately, both airliners received similar design solutions, in particular: avionics, flight control systems and various components. In total, Boeing spent about $3.5–$4 billion on the development of both aircraft.
Design features of the Boeing 767
As mentioned above, computer-aided design was used to speed up the preparation of drawings for much of the 767 design, allowing for high precision, which is very important when a large percentage of the design work is carried out by other companies. A total of 28 companies produce components and assemblies, the cost of which makes up 45 percent of the total cost of the aircraft. The wing design is characterized by increased: sweep, span and chord. Thanks to these features, the wing area can be increased by 53%.
The Boeing 767 is equipped with two turbofan engines suspended on pylons to the wing. It is especially worth noting that at the presentation of the 767, for the first time in history, Boeing offered aircraft buyers a choice of two engine options - Pratt & Whitney JT9D and General Electric CF6. Both models had a maximum thrust of 210 kN (21,772 kg).
The fuselage width is the “golden mean” between the dimensions of the 707 and 747 models, it is 5.03 m. Thus, the maximum number of seats that can fit in a row with two aisles = 7 (2+3+2 configuration).
For the first time in the history of aircraft manufacturing, the aircraft was equipped with a “glass cockpit”, the equipment of which took over control of the aircraft during flight. The commander and co-pilot only control the operation of all systems. This innovation allowed airlines to reduce crew costs and eliminate the services of a flight engineer. However, United Airlines expressed concerns about the risks of introducing the first 767s and initially required a flight engineer on board. Finally, in July 1981, US regulatory authorities confirmed that, with current technical equipment, it is absolutely safe to fly a wide-body aircraft with a crew of 2 people. However, a three-person cabin remained an option for some time, but was eventually installed only on the first Boeing 767s.
First flight and tests
The prototype aircraft, registration N767BA, powered by Pratt & Whitney JT9D turboprop engines, rolled out of the hangar on August 4, 1981. By that time, the aircraft had received 173 firm orders from 17 airlines, including Air Canada, All Nippon Airways, Britannia Airways, Transbrazil and Trans World Airlines.
On September 26, 1981, the Boeing 767 made its first flight under the control of test pilots Tommy Edmonds, Lew Wallick and John Brit. The first flight was uneventful, except for a problem with the landing gear caused by leaked hydraulic fluid.
Test flights and testing of the Boeing 767 continued for 10 months. 6 copies were built specifically for this purpose. The first four aircraft were equipped with JT9D engines, and the remaining two were CF6. Five aircraft were used to test avionics and flight control systems, and the sixth was tested physical abilities liner. During testing, pilots described the 767 as “easy to fly, but with the nuanced maneuverability of large wide-body aircraft.”
In July 1982, after 1,600 hours of flight testing, the JT9D was certified by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. civil aviation USA (FAA), as well as the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).
On August 19, 1982, United Airlines became the first operator of the Boeing 767-200.
In September 1982, the 767-200 was certified with CF6 engines. Its deliveries to Delta Airlines began in October 1982.
Boeing 767 and the airline business
The introduction of the aircraft into airline service went virtually without problems. In the first year of operation, 96.1% of aircraft took off and landed without delays due to technical problems. The airlines were satisfied with both the economic characteristics of the aircraft and its internal comfort. As for the “childhood diseases” of the 767, some sensors, the evacuation ladder lock and the stabilizer have undergone modifications.
To expand the capabilities of the 767 and offer airlines a suitable configuration, Boeing is offering the 767-200ER (Extended Range) model with an extended range. The first order for this aircraft was placed by Ethiopian Airlines in December 1982.
Compared to the 767-200, the 767-200ER modification is equipped with additional fuel tanks, due to which the flight range has been increased from 7,300 km to 11,825 km. The aircraft entered commercial service on March 27, 1984.
In the mid-1980s, the Boeing 767 became one of the most regularly flown aircraft on North Atlantic international routes. This happened thanks to changes in flight safety rules governing distance from alternate airfields (ETOPS). Under the old ETOPS rules, a twin-engine aircraft must be routed so that it is always within 90 minutes of the nearest airfield where it can make an emergency landing if one of its engines fails.
In the new ETOPS rules, the departure time from an alternate aerodrome has been increased to 120 minutes, provided the airline is of good technical standing.
Changes in ETOPS regulations were achieved due to the increased reliability demonstrated by twin-engine aircraft and new generation engines. Subsequently, the distance from the airfield was increased to 180 minutes.
Thanks to amendments to the ETOPS rules, sales of the Boeing 767 increased, and the aircraft began to be actively used on transatlantic routes between major cities.
Appearance of 767-300
Following the successful debut of the 767-200, airlines have shown interest in modifying the aircraft with increased passenger capacity. In 1983, Boeing offered two stretched versions, the 767-300 and 767-300ER. The manufacturer said both aircraft will be able to accommodate 20% more passengers. The first customer for the 767-300 was Japan Airlines. The first flight took place on January 30, 1986. Commercial operation of the aircraft began on October 20, 1986.
As for the 767-300ER modification, the first test flight of the aircraft took place on December 9, 1986. The airliner's first customer was American Airlines. The 767-300ER began commercial service on March 3, 1988.
Experiments and further evolution
After commercialization of the 767-300, Boeing developed an experimental design for the double-deck 767-200DD, which was secretly nicknamed the “Hunchback of Mukilteo.” To be clear, Mukilteo is a small town located next to the city of Everett, where one of Boeing's large factories is located. The lower deck of the airliner was taken from the 767-300, and the upper deck from the 757 model. The project did not arouse any interest among airlines.
In 1986, Boeing announced a project for a new modification of the 767-X with an expanded fuselage and extended wing. However, this project did not arouse interest among airlines. By 1988, the 767-X became a separate development and later became the . In the meantime, the 767-300 remained the second largest (after) in the Boeing catalog.
Thanks to a favorable global economic situation and new amendments to the ETOPS rules, Boeing 767 sales increased by the early 1990s. The most successful year was 1989, during which 132 firm orders for the Boeing 767 were received. At the same time, the 767 became the best-selling wide-body aircraft in the Boeing catalog. Model 767 becomes the most common in the period between North America and Europe. If you take the statistics, it turns out that by the early 2000s, the Boeing 767 crossed the Atlantic Ocean more often than all aircraft combined in the entire history of aviation. It is also undeniable that the aircraft had a significant impact on the development of the aviation industry as a whole, since now direct flights could connect secondary airports on charter routes.
In February 1990, British Airways received the first 767-300 equipped with the new generation Rolls-Royce RB211 engines. However, there were some minor problems. After six months of operation, the carrier was forced to ground its entire 767-300 fleet after cracks were discovered in the pylons (the unit that attaches the engine to the wing) on one of the aircraft. It turned out that the cracks appeared due to the large weight of the RB211 engines (almost 1,000 kg heavier than other 767 engines). In 1991, Boeing made changes to the pylon design and the 767 fleet was refurbished based on manufacturer recommendations.
In January 1993, transport company UPS Airlines ordered the development of a cargo version of the 767-300F. Commercial operation of the aircraft began on October 16, 1995. Unlike the regular 767-300, the model featured a strengthened fuselage structure, a new wing and a stronger landing gear.
In November 1993, the Japanese government placed an order for a military modification of the Boeing E-767 (airborne early warning aircraft). The model is based on the 767-200ER. Deliveries of two E-767s took place in 1998.
In the 1990s, the main competitor of the 767 model was the Boeing aircraft, which was superior in capacity, range and efficiency. Moreover, Boeing has noted that the long-haul fleet of major airline Delta Airlines, consisting of a fleet of outdated Lockheed L-1011s, needs to be replaced. Both factors prompted Boeing to create a more modern and advanced model 767-400ER, which, according to the manufacturer's promises, was supposed to be 12% more efficient.
In October 1997, Continental Airlines expressed interest in the 767-400ER to replace its fleet of aging McDonnell Douglas DC-10s.
Since 2008, orders began to be received for the conversion of 767-300 passenger aircraft into 767-300BCF cargo aircraft. The first customer was All Nippon Airways.
767-300ER
The 767-300ER modification is a version of the 767-300 with an increased flight range and increased take-off weight. The aircraft is equipped with Pratt & Whitney PW400, General Electric CF6 or Rolls-Royce RB211 engines (to choose from). The airliner is actively used on transcontinental flights (for example, Los Angeles - Frankfurt). In general, this version turned out to be the most popular than all other modifications of the Boeing 767 combined. As of 2012, there are 527 767-300ER aircraft in service. The main competitor of the airliner is the Airbus A330-200.
Based on the 767-300ER, a cargo version of the 767-300F was created, the first customer of which was UPS Airlines in 1995. The Boeing 767-300F can accommodate up to 24 standard pallets (2200 by 3200 mm) on the main deck and up to 30 LD2 containers on the lower deck. As of 2012, there are approximately 71 767-300F aircraft in service. Orders for this modification continue to arrive.
767-400ER
The 767-400ER is the latest modernized version of the Boeing 767. Compared to the 767-300ER, the fuselage of the 767-400ER is 6.5 meters longer, and its total length 61.4 meters. The liner can carry up to 375 passengers (in a one-class configuration). The wingspan was increased by 4.36 meters, and wingtips (winglets) were also added. The cockpit was equipped in the spirit of the Boeing 777. The maximum flight range was 10,418 km. A typical route for the 767-400ER is London-Tokyo. A total of 37 aircraft were produced in the 767-400ER modification. The airliner's main competitor is the A330-200.
Special modifications of the Boeing 767
E-767- long-range radar detection aircraft (AWACS). IN general outline is the radar equipment of the Boeing E-3 Sentry aircraft installed on the Boeing 767-200 aircraft. Designed to monitor airspace and search for air targets. The order for the E-767 came from the Japanese Air Force in 1992. The aircraft were converted from passenger Boeing 767s. The E-767 made its first flight on August 9, 1996. Deliveries began in 1998.
FACH 1- the plane of the President of Chile, created on the basis of the Boeing 767-300ER. The airliner was created to replace the outdated 707. In addition to carrying the president, FACH 1 is capable of performing various strategic missions.
KC-767– a strategic refueling aircraft developed on the basis of the 767-200ER. The aircraft was originally planned to be delivered to the US Air Force to replace KC-135 tankers, but the order was canceled and it was decided to produce the KC-767 for foreign customers. In July 2001, the Italian Air Force ordered four KC-767s in the Combi variant. In January 2002, the KC-767 was ordered for the Japanese Air Force. It is also planned to create a tanker aircraft based on the 767-300ER together with BAE Systems, Serco and Spectrum Capital. under the Future Strategic Tanker Aircraft (FSTA) program for the UK.
The KC-767 can carry up to 108,944 liters of fuel in its main and auxiliary tanks. Aircraft can be refueled at a rate of 2,271 liters per minute. In transport configuration, the aircraft can carry up to 19 standard 463-L military containers.
Nord Wind Company ( Nordwind Airlines or “North Wind”) owns 8 Boeing 767-300 aircraft. However, only three aircraft can be found on the company's flights. The remaining 5 aircraft are leased to a partner company (Pegas Fly).
The following aircraft fly for Nord Wind: VQ-BPT, VQ-BMQ and VP-BDI. The aircraft are quite old and have worked for a number of airlines in America and Europe:
- The VQ-BPT aircraft made its first flight in July 1995. I managed to fly for the following airlines: KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, Zoom Airlines, ILFC and Flyglobespan.
- The VQ-BMQ aircraft made its first flight in March 1996. Managed to fly for the following airlines: KLM Royal Dutch Airlines and North American Airlines.
- The VQ-BPT aircraft made its first flight in April 2000. Managed to fly for the following airlines: Air 2000, GECAS, Aeroflot - Russian Airlines.
On the company's website you can see two options for cabin layout: 290 seats and 300 seats. Both layout options are two-class (business and economy classes). The 290-seat version has 39 rows, and the 300-seat version has 43 rows. The seating diagram can be viewed at this link.
In our review, we will analyze the 290-seat scheme in detail.
Row 1 and 2.
The only two rows are business class. There are 12 such places in total. For obvious reasons, these are the most best places on the liner. The distance between the seats is 127 cm.
The distance between the rows of seats in economy class is 74 cm. It turns out a little cramped.
Row 17. Bad places. The chairs rest against the wall from the toilet, which means the backrest is limited in reclining. There is also a constant crowd of people near the chair, waiting in line to use the toilet. The fact that the WC door is constantly opening will definitely cause odors from the toilet.
Row 18. Quite contradictory places. On the one hand, there is no row in front (due to the emergency exit), so there is a lot of legroom. On the other hand, there are toilets in front, and this is not good.
Row 19. The distance to the front row is slightly larger than standard, which means there is room to stretch your legs. The only thing is that the row is quite noisy due to the proximity of the toilets.
Row 38. Very similar to row 16. Located close to toilets. There is always a lot of traffic here, so the flight will not be calm.
Row 39. Some of the worst seats in the cabin. They have all the disadvantages of row 17. In addition to this, it is always colder in the back of the plane, and if the air conditioning is not working well, it is also stuffy. Not recommended for booking by people in poor health.
30.08.2017, 05:16
Boeing 767-300ER is a wide-body long-haul airliner. Modification of the Boeing 767-300 with an increased flight range. The longer flight range was achieved by increasing the volume of fuel on board by increasing the maximum take-off weight to 185 tons. By 1993, work to improve the design of the aircraft made it possible to raise the MVM to 187 tons.
The aircraft uses the EFIS digital avionics complex manufactured by the American company Rockwell-Collins, which has six color multifunction displays. A similar complex is used on Boeing 757 aircraft. Power plant options included CF6-80C2B2 and PW4000 engines.
The Austrian airline Lauda Air became the launch customer for the version with Pratt 8c Whitney engines in April 1987. British Airways was the first to purchase the variant with the more powerful Rolls-Royce RB211-524G/H (the variant was certified in December 1989).
The first aircraft took off on November 9, 1986, but Boeing received its first orders for the aircraft only in March 1987 from American Airlines. Deliveries of the aircraft began in February 1988.
Typical routes for this modification were Los Angeles - Frankfurt, Moscow - Beijing, etc.
The version with increased range and passenger capacity of the Boeing 767-300ER has become the most popular in the Boeing 767 family. As of March 2014, 582 aircraft of this modification were delivered. The main competitor of this modification is the Airbus A330-200.
Location and numbering of seats in the cabin, seat layout on the Boeing 767-300ER aircraft. The best and least comfortable seats on the plane
Cabin layout, the best and least comfortable seats on the Boeing 767-300ER
5 row- these are business class seats, very comfortable. Modern business, comfortable chairs that recline to almost 180 degrees. There are 17.1-inch monitors on the wall. Exquisite menu to choose from.
21 row- This is the first row of economy class. The advantage of these seats is that there are no passengers in front and no one will recline their seat on you. Among the small disadvantages: there is a wall in front throughout the flight. But it has mounts for baby bassinets, so it’s convenient for parents.
26 row C, D, E and 27 row. The backs of the seats in these rows have a limitation in reclining, as they rest against the partitions and the kitchen wall. It is not always convenient to be in an upright position.
The distance between rows in economy class is about 83 cm.
28 row. There are no passengers in front, so no one will recline their seat, but throughout the flight there will be a wall in front of their eyes. There are toilets nearby, which may cause some inconvenience due to frequent movement of people.
33 row A,B,G,H and 34 row C,D,E,F. After changing the interior, the backs of the seats recline, the seats are comfortable.
34 row A and H. There is additional legroom, but there may be no armrest on the hatch side.
34 row B, G and 35 row C,D,E,F - the most convenient places. There is enough legroom in front of them. Toilets and other technical areas are located far away from the sites.
Seats in the last row of economy class. The backrests can be fixed. Also, proximity to toilets can make the flight uncomfortable. Register for these rows last.
Be careful, on almost all aircraft of this type there is a slight difference in row numbering. The extreme numbers differ from the average ones. If you follow these tips, you can find your seat in any aircraft configuration.
Flight performance
- Maximum speed: 910 km/h
- Cruising speed: 850 km/h
- Flight range: 11000 km
- Aircraft capacity: economy class – 328 passengers, economy/business – 269 passengers, economy/business/first class – 218 passengers
Loading...