Narrowbody vs Widebody – Which Is Best For Long Haul?

One of the defining trends in aviation is the movement towards long and skinny routes using narrowbody aircraft. This has led to the demise of several aircraft designed for hub-to-hub transport, as point-to-point has become more common. However, much of these new long-haul routes are being operated (or will be operated) with narrowbody aircraft. So which is better? A narrowbody, or a widebody?

Narrowbody vs widebody
Are narrowbodies or widebodies better for a long-haul flight? Photo: Jay Singh/Simple Flying

Long-haul narrowbody flights

One of the longest-range narrowbodies is the Airbus A321XLR. With plenty of orders for the type, Airbus has successfully introduced a new middle-of-the-market aircraft that is capable of covering long-haul flights without compromising efficiency and causing overcapacity. While some will complain that a long-haul flight on a narrowbody will be brutal, there are some other points to consider.

Airbus A321XLR infographic
The Airbus A321XLR is one of the longest-range narrowbodies on the market. Rendering: Airbus

Narrowbodies are smaller. The A321XLR can seat between 180 and 220 passengers in a two-class configuration. A widebody, like the A330neo, can seat around 300 passengers in a typical two-class configuration. As a result, this means that, with the smaller plane, less time is spent on the ground because boarding can be completed quicker. In addition, deplaning will take less time.

At the airport, there will be fewer people queued ahead of you if you deplane last. Furthermore, with fewer passengers, it means that airlines will have to handle fewer bags so the wait at baggage claim should be less than it would be with a widebody flight.

Featured Video:

Most widebody aircraft, like the A350, 787, and 777, have a 3-3-3 or 3-4-3 configuration. The A321XLR and 737 MAX both seat six-abreast in a 3-3 configuration. So, overall, flying on a narrowbody is not entirely less comfortable than on a widebody in terms of seating configuration. In fact, on some narrowbodies, the seat width is greater than that of widebody aircraft!

Norwegian Interior
Some narrowbody aircraft have wider seats than widebody aircraft. Photo: Boeing

Obviously, with a smaller narrowbody aircraft, it means that there isn’t much room to move around. With only one aisle, there is less space to walk around the cabin. In addition, during meal services, this can lead to difficulty in terms of navigating to a lavatory.

Cabin crew may have issues, as narrowbodies do not allow for crew rests. Airlines may block off a portion of seats, or flight attendants may be restricted to the galley during flight. Ultimately, this could lead to some discomfort for the cabin crew. Moreover, with a fewer number of crew onboard, some may experience a lesser quality of service compared to a widebody with greater staffing.

La compagnie champagne service
The single-aisle can become a pain to navigate during inflight services. Photo: La Compagnie

Long-haul widebody flights

Widebodies are exceptionally common on long-haul flights. In fact, most people associate long-haul flying with widebodies. These aircraft typically have far more range than long-haul narrowbodies and operate some of the world’s longest flights.


Obviously, with twin-aisle aircraft, there is more room to move around. This allows for some flexibility for passengers who wish to use the lavatory during services. Furthermore, there is more room for passengers who can then avoid crowding the aisle.

Cabin crew also have dedicated crew rest areas. No doubt these are welcome features for flight attendants working on a long-haul flight.

Furthermore, widebodies generally allow for greater overhead bin space onboard meaning most passengers will have access to their personal items mid flight.

Overhead bin space
Widebodies generally have more overhead bin space than a narrowbody. Photo: Simple Flying

Another positive aspect of widebodies is that airlines can offer more flexible premium seating. Direct aisle access in premium cabins is more common on widebodies than narrowbodies. Furthermore, widebodies allow for more seating overall, which means more chances of either upgrades or award travel. On narrowbodies, more seating can come at the expense of key amenities like privacy or direct aisle access.

Widebodies allow for more premium-cabin seats. Photo: Jay Singh/Simple Flying

Obviously, with more people onboard, it can take longer for all passengers to disembark. For passengers who disembark last, this can mean longer lines at immigration and the baggage claim.

Some widebodies also have incredibly narrow seats and tight configurations. These configurations are possible because airlines can be more flexible with twin-aisle options. High-density widebodies can be more uncomfortable than narrowbodies.

Which is better?

Most people will prefer a long-haul flight on a widebody. However, that does not necessarily mean a widebody is a superior option. Airlines are increasingly moving forward with narrowbodies on long-haul routes. This opens up additional options for connections, new routes, and additional capacity. At the end of the day, it really depends on the passengers.

Passengers who would prefer to spend less time traveling may find that at a single long-haul flight on a narrowbody is better than two flights with one (or both) being operated with widebody aircraft.

Nevertheless, a narrowbody long-haul flight is not necessarily bad. What is great about offering both is that passengers can choose how they want to travel. After all, some of the fun is in the journey, right?

Do you prefer widebodies or narrowbodies for long-haul flights? Would you fly a narrowbody long-haul flight? Let us know in the comments!

  1. I would NEVER fly a narrowbody aircraft on a long-haul flight. Who would want to keep bumping into other passengers and the flight crew just to be able to move around, say, on an 8 hour or more flight.

  2. Widebody for long haul,no contest.With widebody there are more two seats for partners to snuggle together; aisle ac cess is more important for lavatories, but also to get up and stretch and move around, especially for passengers cramped back in steerage. Single aisles mean lots of middle seats,and two bodies to climb over to go to the lavatories,and a blocked up line in the aisle waiting to use them.

    1. Well in a 3-4-3, you get the same proportion of middle seats as there are 2 middle seats per row per aisle so it’s the same as a 3-3 narrow body. If it’s a 3-3-3 widebody, it’s is 1.5 seats per aisle per row which is the same as a 2-3 narrow body. Only if it’s a 2-4-2 or 2-3-2 do you get fewer middle seats.

  3. I prefer a widebody plane due to the fact more room to move around and Delta one has lay flat seats with better amenities than just the business class seats on a narrowbody plane.

  4. Depends on the widebody and narrowbody in question. I would rather fly an A321 with wider seats and more pitch than 787 with narrower seats. The same pitch and seat width, widebody obviously.

  5. which one is the best ?
    1. the direct flight is the best
    2. the cheapest is also really good, if the price difference is more than 25%
    3. and if everything is somehow the same at first 2 points than the flight with best timing is also good.
    and this at economy. don’t care what type of plane will be used, most of travelers don’t care either

  6. I generally prefer widebodies, because there is a greater sense of space, and the two aisles make it easier to move around. However, narrowbodies can also give a sense of “less of a crowd” around you: any of you who have flown upstairs in a 747 will probably agree that it gives a blissful “private jet” feeling. For this reason, I’d love to try a longhaul flight on an A220 🙂

    From the point of view of statistics, there is a downside to widebodies: the more people you have around you, the greater the chance of nuisances such as crying babies, covert farters, snorters, loud talkers, etc.

    And now for something COMPLETELY different:
    How about taking a plane with a 3-3-3 economy seating configuration, such as an A350, and instead configuring it as 2-2-2-2…in other words, with THREE aisles? Now, in each row, 6 out of every 8 passengers have direct aisle access, there’s no more middle seat, everyone has more privacy, and there’s even more room to move around. Some modification of existing luggage bins would be required, but this should be do-able. To compensate for lost revenue, make each seat 11 percent more expensive, and sell it as a separate brand. I’d certainly be willing to pay a little bit more for such comfort!

    1. Interesting idea….but I don’t think airlines would appreciate this concept. This would cut down on so much usable space in galleys and lavatories because there will need to be a center aisle. Furthermore, increasing fares would add a barrier of entry for those who want to travel somewhere. Also, families tend to be one of the main groups of passengers in coach. The 2-4-2 or 3-3-3 gives a family more flexibility of how and where they want to sit. For example, when my family and I travel in coach, we prefer a 3-3-3 777 since we can stretch out amongst each other. Let’s say a family is traveling with children and they want their children to lie down and sleep, the 2-2-2-2 will limit the room they have to stretch out.

  7. One thing nobody is mentioning.
    How many lavatories are in narrow body and how many in wide body?
    Because i didnt see narrow body with three groups of lavatories(double in front, double in middle, and double in back), only with two(front and back). And with two classes, the front will be for business only. So they will be 2 lavatories for 180 passengers on an 8 hours flight.

    1. Your point is valid, although there are interstitial lavatory units available…I’ve seen them in the middle of A321 cabins.
      A similar point could be made about galleys: a long haul flight will require far more food catering than the typical short haul flight.
      I think that long haul narrowbodies will (have to) look quite different to what we’re used to on the inside…

    2. Several airlines outfit A321s with a lavatory about halfway through the plane. I know for certain I’ve seen this on Delta Air Lines. I’d expect on a long-haul flight that there would be one lavatory for 12-16 business class passengers. Then there could be about 3-4 lavatories for 150-odd coach and premium economy passengers? Maybe two midway through the aircraft (to avoid congestion) and two towards the rear of the aircraft. I highly doubt that most non-LCC A321XLRs will seat close to 220 passengers. Instead, I’d expect them to be anywhere near 150-180 passengers in a three-class configuration (Business, Premium Economy, and Coach).

      1. I think some airlines will do that.
        But there will be some low cost long haul flights where the comfort will be at the end.
        But the prices will be low. So customers will decide if really dense low cost long haul flight will have a future.

  8. As I fly economy, I prefer breaks to stretch my legs and use a real toilet, especially on narrowbodies. CBR-CNS-TPE-HND sounds much more pleasant than CBR-SYD-HND, narrowbody or widebody. But on long-haul, if I had to choose between two planes, widebody it is for amenity.

  9. I frequently take flights longer than 10 hrs and in all of them the majority of passengers do not move around. Some may do a sprint to a rest room, rest of the time they are plugged into the seat. Therefore, the space in a wide body is a plus but not a concern for most people provided the cabin layout does not feel like a dungeon. More frequent routes and “potentially” cheaper fair would be far more important.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recommended Stories: