A few weeks ago I flew JFK-FRA and back in the new 757 BE cabin.
Although seats are quite new, the whole experience is just terrible.
If Delta think I will ever take an intercontinental flight with them
in such a small plane, they are nuts. Those seats don't even
recline that much. The cabin feels very claustrophobic for a long flight.
A couple of weeks ago I flew Swiss LAX-ZRH-LAX in their C cabin.
When I took a seat I started laughing remembering my 757 flight!
It's a big Airbus with tons of space and great seats. Feels great,
great service and food. Night and day comparing to Delta.
Not sure what their plan is, but for sure it's not working.
Don't give a damn about Delta miles anymore, if my choice is a cramped
small, old plane with so-so service, I will never take those...

Just wait till they get ETOPS certification for the CR-9

Well add NW, CO and US to that list. All fly 757's TATL on thin routes from Northeastern hubs.

Also, add AA to that as they fly them to some SA int'l destinations.

It's not the most comfortable, but they are better than coach. I personally won't fly them in BE because I don't think I would get the experience that I want!

I flew one of the newly configured 757's from JFK to SLC. Sat up front and actually enjoyed the seat as much (if not a little more) as the 767 BE seats. The added lumbar features on the 757 seat were good once I finally figured out how to use them.

This was a 5 hour flight, so the extra comfort on the domestic haul was nice.

That said, I didn't pay for BE service so perhaps this wouldn't be meeting the needs of each and every paying customer.

It isn't like they are only putting a domestic first class seat in there and masking it as BE.

We must all understand that with fuel prices being where they are today, often the only way to justify flying a route non-stop is to "right size" it. If the route mentioned was only to be flown with a 76X+ sized aircraft, it would not be profitable. Would you prefer the ability to travel in BE on a 757 non stop for a short TATL hop, or would you want to stop in CDG just to fly in a Wide Body? As far as im concerened, put me in the 757 and keep the stop.

Some of you act as though they are sending the 757 from ATL to ICN. Geeze...

Having just flown in both on the same day, I slightly prefer the 757 BE cabin to the 767 BE cabin. The smaller plane seemed less noisy with fewer seats/people, and the service was more personal and less mass-produced feeling.

Then again the single aisle on the 757 gets pretty congested, so the double-aisle 767 clearly wins in the 'must get up and walk around before going crazy' category.

Gee, the Luftwaffe flies a dinky 737 between EWR and FRA. How in the world do they manage to get any customers to fly on such a tiny airplane?

Oh, and a Gulfstream G500 is an even smaller airplane than the 757 and 737, and people fly in these across the Atlantic.

Also, the upper deck on a 747 is rather small, but most airlines use it as a business class cabin.

The point is, what does the size of the aircraft have to do with anything?

I think he was referring mainly to the BE seats not being as nice as those on the B767 and B777 a/c.

You are mistaken, the Luftwaffe does not fly any 737s. You might be referring to their A310s? These are widebodies, though.

I think you'll find he's referring to the BBJ LH contracts with PrivatAir to fly in an all-C configuration.

And which they have been flying for about 5 years now. No one complains. Would the OP also complain about flying in J on the top of a 747? I only ask because I find it to be roughly the same experience and personally when flying a 747 always prefer it on top. Considering the fact that the routes which are suitable for 757's TA are only marginally longer than transcontinental US flights I really do not see what the fuss is.

Seriously, when carriers first started flying 757's across the pond I was dubious, however at the end of the day a 75 is quite a good a/c across the pond as long as you are flying upfront. In the back it may be hell, but personally that is not something that I have experienced.

To me it makes all the difference. I need space and air
when I fly, a small plane is just terrible to me...

The size of the plane is not what makes the difference, it's the *configuration* the AIRLINE chooses to employ. Depending on how spacious or "economical" an airline decides to go, a 757 can be downright wallowy and a 777 can be a total sardine can.

It's not as if the scheduled aircraft should be a big surprise: many booking systems show aircraft prominently. Anyone 'needing' big aircraft is going to have to be very selective on destinations and routing any more.

I agree with this post. Yesterday I flew business on Continental from MAN to EWR in a 757. The seats were comfortable (wider than the Delta 767 BE), and the service was superb--very personal and attentive. It makes me sad that Continental is leaving Sky Team.