I flew the 787 Dreamliner!
 

United was short-hopping it from LAX back to Houston. Can't remember the last time I was on a nice new plane on a domestic flight. Even in cattle class/award seat, it was a comfortable plane due to some of the supposed features of the new design (quiet, less vibration, cleaner more humid air, lower cabin altitude).

I couldn't figure out how to plug in headphones or earpods to get sound on the back-seat movie/ tv screen. it was a late night flight and I didn't care to bother the attendant to ask. However I noticed that you can select closed caption subtitles and watch without a headphone.

Each seat back had a USB plug so you could recharge your iPod.

The overhead bins were interesting, they were tall so that hardsided carryon bags could be stored standing on their sides, rather than flat.

Not the best person to comment on seat space since I have short legs.

I would certainly look for this plane again if I had a choice.

Nice to hear! I am flying it this winter.

Yes, thanks for the report. I've been wondering about the 787. DS is flying on a 787 to NRT (Tokyo) from LAX next month, and I am considering a flight to BKK that is part 787 for October! Leg room will be very important, as I'm tall!

<i>Leg room will be very important, as I'm tall!</i>

Leg room has nothing to do with the type of airplane and everything to do on how each airline decides on seating layout.

That's very true, gardyloo. It is up to the individual airline. That's why I've been very hesitant to try economy class on a long haul flight on an Asia carrier. Asians are typically NOT very tall people. I now have a business class ticket in my hands for ANA. It is not on the 787, however.

I fly a lot with UA and I'm what they call a 1K, plus I've got more than a million miles with UA. I can always get economy+ seating on any United flight. The leg room is much better than some other airlines I've flown in regular economy (for example, SWISS is awful!). I will often take two flights to get from ORD to ZRH instead of a non-stop if I can do the trip on UA and not have to deal with LX.

So your comment about the airline and not the airplane is 100% correct.

<<It is up to the individual airline. That's why I've been very hesitant to try economy class on a long haul flight on an Asia carrier. Asians are typically NOT very tall people>>

I would argue 99% of Full Service Asian airlines have more leg room than standard economy on United, even Swiss has more room

I have not been in standard economy on UA for a long time. Maybe that's why I feel so cramped in economy on Swiss when I fly them.

Just booked a trip that will include long haul on a UA 787 up front! This will be in late October.

I look forward to hearing about your flight, Carol!

I flew the first 787 in commercial service on ANA. Not the first flight, but it was before they took it on a long haul. It had 2x4x2 seats across. There was space between the two middle seats in the center, so all 8 seats had an armrest which as not shared. Also flew a Qatar Airways 787 which was 3x3x3 (the business class looked wonderful). Both comfortable, but both were short-haul.

More space (pitch and width() in 787 economy on an ANA than United. I think all United 787s are 3x3x3. Some ANA 787s have 3x3x3 but their website still shows a 2x4x2 config.

Much more space in long-haul United business class than any ANA business class. An ANA 773 has their newer flat-bed seat at 62" x 21" (seatguru.com) vs 78" x 22" on United (united.com). United has more seat pitch but less width in business class than ANA has in first class on the 773 (76" x 33"). I've not pulled the trigger on an ANA business class award because the length is just go short for me.

Was on JAL's 787 BOS-NRT-BOS. No F on the plane. The business seat was wider than any other I've been on since the barcaloungers or cradle, but it was angled flat. Nice feature: toilets were the Totos w/washlet. Service was, as expected, excellent and attentive on both flights. Meal service was a meal served after take-off (choice of Kaiseki or a couple of Western entrees), then a la carte when you wanted it for the rest of the flight.

Thanks for all the reports!

The version that shows 2-3-2 62" in business on NH's 77W are the old-style non-flat seats. The newer configurations, as well as on the 787, are staggered flat-beds in 1-2-1 (or alternate 1-2-1 and 1-1-1 on 787). Seatguru says 44" pitch, and if you multiple by two, you get a true seat pitch of 88"; while seat length is 74.5". [And some seatguru info is just wrong.]

Problem is that it's not easy to find out which aircraft you'll get and with the 787 mess, substitution is possible. This is the most updated info on FT about which route has old seat:

NRT-MUC (until 01SEP13)
NRT-SEA (daily until 19SEP13; F sold as C, PY sold as Y)
NRT-ORD (NH1011/1012 only from 01SEP13)
NRT-JFK (intermittently on NH1009/1010)

And one should also read the width more carefully. Most list the actual width of the seat/mattress. But doesn't take account of elbow room or exactly how far you're from your seatmate.

Thanks rk. I was wondering how anybody (other than the Japanese) could make flatbed seat of only 62". Flat-bed 44" would be wacky.