United Airlines has been working on improvements to business class. They updated the bedding and amenity kits. They’ve set a new U.S. carrier standard for business class wine. They’ve come to believe that investing more in meals helps them sell premium tickets.
However the Polaris business class seat remains a laggard.
- It was a ‘me too’ product back when it was first introduced in 2017. Approved by penny-pinching disgraced former CEO Jeff Smisek, it was meant to stop the bleeding – customers were avoiding United business class because it lacked direct aisle access even. This seat was chosen because they could get lie flat direct aisle access without taking up more cabin real estate compared to 2-2-2 seating. There’s not a lot of space per passenger. There’s basically no storage space, either.
- While the overall cabin ambiance is nice, the seat itself lags even American’s primary current seat (Super Diamond) and American is introducing a new suite with doors. Delta business class seats are far better, outside of their Boeing 767 fleet. United’s seats lag British Airways, Air France, and even joint venture partners Air Canada (which will be getting a new seat) and Lufthansa’s new Allegris seat.
- United was looking at new seat options with doors three years ago. They even had customers provide feedback on new seat options with doors in 2022.
Yet we still haven’t seen a new product. Aviation watchdog JonNYC says that an announcement is coming in May and that doors remain an open question owing it sounds to me like the FAA’s insistence on additional flight attendant staffing for them. There will be 64 business class seats and a premium bulkhead row! (American’s new premium-dense 787-9s will have 51 business class suites.)
UA some will have seen this (and many are asking about it)
My belief is that the statement:
“New 787-9 (78L) configuration with 64/35/123 has been released to employees.” is false, nothing has been shared internally so far is what I’m told .
Id expect some announcements in early May though.— JonNYC (@xjonnyc.bsky.social) April 19, 2025 at 1:39 PM
Additionally, the doors are still very much an open issue— def not decided at this time— due to FA staffing dispute.
— JonNYC (@xjonnyc.bsky.social) April 19, 2025 at 1:41 PM
LET ME RETRACT the part about it being false that this has been disseminated — sorry for that error!
Bulkhead Polaris seats having ottomans (for a companion to dine, etc etc— JonNYC (@xjonnyc.bsky.social) April 19, 2025 at 5:32 PM
so wild to see *16* rows of 1x2x1 seating– can kinda understand where the AFA is coming from on this
— JonNYC (@xjonnyc.bsky.social) April 19, 2025 at 5:47 PM
JetBlue actually disabled the doors on some of its Mint suites because the FAA wanted more cabin crew onboard to monitor that the doors were locked open for takeoff and landing.
Relatedly, JonNYC notes speculation that brand new Boeing 787-9 aircraft, which would presumably come with new seats, could replace 767s for long haul. The old 767s frequently have broken crew rest seats, and the United Airlines flight attendants union has a pending grievance over this that could result in the airline being limited in its use of the planes to trips of around 8 hours maximum.
Polaris offers a critical advantage that most of the carriers you listed do not – a 100% consistent hard product experience across the entire widebody international fleet. For Delta, you gloss over how large their 767 fleet and just how inferior that product is. None of DL, AA, BA or LH can remotely match United’s consistency here. If you book a United Polaris seat, you know exactly what you are getting.
Is it better than all of these airlines best seat? Possibly not (although I take issue with the premise that Polaris is noticeably inferior). However, is Polaris better than all of these airlines least best seat – some of which still comprise a majority or their respective fleets – yes, vastly.
John nailed it. The Polaris seats can feel a bit claustrophobic and the food generally sucks (although it’s just as good as what AA and Delta offer) but at least I know what I’m getting. If they offered a truly improved (wider) business (or even better a first) class seat again I might forego the ME3 and Singapore/Air France. They probably lose $150K per worth of business per year from me alone.
Not much at all in the grand scheme of things but I can’t be alone. My wife and I fly a fair amount and I know others who fly a lot more.
I personally prefer the United Polaris seat to any business class seat that American or Delta offer. It is not claustrophobic.
Delta seats are flat out awful on the 767 and most A330 – those seats debuted in 2008!
The FAA’s issue could be easily mitigated by modifying the circuit that turns on a green led that FA’s use to check if the seat is locked upright for landing/take off. Add a detector for door open and latched.
No led the FA will open and latch the seat door in the process of fixing the seat position. If led is blue the door is incorrect but seat is ok. Green means all is well per current process.
But as I write I realize the FAA’s position. US airlines are poor in maintaining the cabin so manual checking is the default..
Of all the fascinating airline economics out there, the one the I find most fascinating is how a door is both needed to the point the extra weight and potential maintenance is a non-issue, but also not needed the second an extra FA is needed, whose time amounts to ~$20/J seat/flight.
Polaris was designed purposefully to be the densest business class seat in the US. Because Smizek wanted his 2-4-2 J cabin to be just as dense with all aisle access.
I’m amazed more travel bloggers don’t talk about that.
Good riddance if they ever do get rid of it. It’s a Smizek relic that shouldn’t be celebrated.
The strive for density that fractionally compromised dimensional fit that many here complain about also permitted the upgrades they sought and enjoyed. Without maintaining density levels, they’d be in upright, non aisle seats in economy. United’s ability to strive for the highest premium cabin ratios is impressive. They do need to staff accordingly to deliver the service they promise… and some crew need to execute it as intended.
Polaris was obsolete when it debuted. Delta had already rolled out the Delta One suites on the A3 . Delta now has 60 aircraft with Delta one Suites and United hasn’t even announced a new product.
Delta somehow managed to staff an A350 and 339 with enough FAs to meet the FAA’s staffing requirements but UA is debating about whether even to offer doors because they won’t staff the planes adequately? FA staffing for doors is the least of the issues.
Despite being the only one of the big 4 that does not have a new FA contract or elevated non-contract FA rates (DL), UA wants to be stingy on FAs?
and let’s be clear that the only way they can make the 787-9 operationally compete with the A350 is by having 50 seats less than DL will have on their newest and most capable 359s, let alone the 35Ks.
the 787 was never designed to go the ranges that UA needs. their costs will soar, they will have an uncompetitive product, and more efficient competitors will eat UA’s lunch.
Pride cometh before the fall.
I’m one of many (and I see some have already chimed in here) that don’t feel Polaris is inferiors to DL and AA.
Tim loses all credibility so his opinions don’t even matter anymore, but I actually prefer UA over the other too. I agree with others that DL’s seat isn’t that comfortable. I don’t think UA is all that small, I think the bedding is what puts it over the top for me. As one that flies long haul wide bodies alot, I don’t really see why a door is a big deal. Whether an airline has one or not, I can’t see anyone else in the private biz class seats and no one can see me. I could care less about the door!
Lisa,
you are free to come up with your own opinion.
but the global industry is moving toward suites with doors.
Polaris was obsolete before it even entered service. They stuck to it for a decade and are now debating whether they will sufficiently staff an aircraft with suites.
DL has managed to operate two widebody types w/ doors for a decade and clearly meets the FAAs requirements.
just as w/ seatback AVOD, where it exists on planes, the majority of passengers use it. Those that argue it doesn’t matter are the ones that don’t ever get on planes that have it and know what they are missing.
and DL has precisely THREE more 767-300ERs than UA at this point. DL will be retiring more 767-300ERs this year and it will be UA that will have not only an even larger fleet of older and less reliable aircraft but also a fleet that is less economical.
and all of the non-sense about the consistency of UA Polaris across the fleet will go out the window the day the first aircraft enters service w the new configuration.
Everyone could see that UA chose an obsolete product and has stuck with it and the arguments for why they haven’t changed it will vaporize in about a month when they realize that, like AVOD that UA copied from DL, suites with doors are a must have.
I also do like the Polaris seat. Important for me is the lie flat seat so I can sleep. Installing a less dense product will most likely mean that the prices go up. Airplane real estate is expensive. There is nothing I really miss with the current Polaris product. Personally, I don’t need doors. Everyone can pick over the door when standing in the aisle anyway. And United has always been about ‘Uniting people – Connecting the World’. It’s more difficult to connect with Doors 🙂 And to Tim’s argument about the A350: If the A350 is really so much better – United has some on order. But they have stated before that they don’t have the Mega Hubs that could fill much bigger airplanes. British Airways makes BNA, AUS etc work on 787. That’s all traffic that would otherwise go via bigger hubs. Maybe the future is more direct? Certainly the A380 has been a struggle for many carriers. Size isn’t everything 🙂
Bill,
the A350, like the A320 compared to the B737, is only slightly larger and more capable but it is enough to make a difference.
No, United didn’t order the B787 because its hubs weren’t big enough. UA didn’t order the 787 because UA is a former division of Boeing and UA wanted the first new generation widebody that became available and that was the 787.
Airbus has followed Boeing on just about every product and has improved in the process.
The A350 is simply a little big larger but has the capability to do far more than the B787. DL has configured its newest A350-900s with 275 seats which is apparently what they think will be enough to fly the maximum those planes can fly which is well beyond what even the high gross weight 787s can fly with 225 passengers.
Being able to carry 50 more passengers and able to fly even further and carry even more cargo matters.
and we aren’t even getting to the A350-1000 which will be the longest range ultra long haul capable new generation aircraft.
Only if Boeing ever gets the 777-8 in the air will there even be a contest.
Yes, UA has A350s on order and they will add enormous cost to their operation to add them on top of their 787s and 777s which will remain in their fleet for another 15 years.
so UA’s solution is to use the planes they have and add higher and higher operating costs.
Some people here are so convinced that UA’s international network is invincible but DL already makes about 30% more profit flying 30% fewer ASMs.
DL IS beating UA in the international marketplace. UA has to subsidize its international network and that will continue to be the case as DL’s international fleet is modernized even further while UA holds onto older 777s and then replaces them w/ less capable 787s.
DL figured out a decade ago that suites matter. Whether you or I want to close the door or not doesn’t matter. Suites have become industry standard.
UA will have a mismatched fleet; Polaris 1 will not be standardized. It took UA 7 years to install Polaris and the retrofit of a new seat will take just as long if not longer.
and UA will either have to not put doors on which will make their product uncompetitive or they have to add additional FAs which will make the plane overstaffed or it won’t be as capable.
UA’s international leadership is very much being challenged – by their own decisions.