This link (https://services.airbus.com/upgrade/cabin/layout-optimisatio...) is actually an Airbus design, but it is almost exactly what I remember on this 737. Not only was it cock-eyed (I don't know what to call it), it was incredibly narrow, even for a 737 bathroom.
But maybe I'm already out. My next flight is booked on JetBlue even though it probably cost me quite a bit more.
Yet they claim it "allows up to 6 additional seats in the cabin". Assuming they're in a row, I fail to see how you can fit a seat in 5.5 inches.
>The interior of Smart-Lav has been designed to enhance the spaciousness and the hygiene perception by the passengers.
It's blatantly focusing on perceptions over reality. I got sick in a plane with a similar layout(I think it was with Emirates) and I remember it being significantly more uncomfortable than any other plane I'd been on, and I think I managed to hit my head while throwing up.
Compare Lufthansas seatmap for the A320 vs A320neo. The neo has the Smartlav and two additional rows of seats.
I have been able to successfully avoid United for the better part of a decade and I fly Alaska and Southwest the most because I’ve had a satisfactory level of service as the norm with them, not because their prices are the cheapest- else I’d be flying Spirit airlines.
1. they're the only ones available for the dates/times we need
2. paying 40-150% more is prohibitive for many folks (and generally, is not a 'few bucks').
If we had 30 inch and 28 inch pitch seats, and you could choose, and people would pay, say $10 more for 30 inch, that might get us a bit closer to the original comment, but we're nowhere near that set of options.
We have no other options because most people don't care as much about seat size as they care about money. The market is working, here, it's just not working in a way that you appreciate.
It's that airlines don't tell you how badly cramped your seat is going to be, you don't think about it when buying, and people have a short memory unless the experience was so brutally bad that it fixes itself in your memory.
They should, at the very least, be forced to disclose the seat pitch on every flight, so people can make an informed decision - and then, yes, you can let the market decide.
At the moment there's no reward for offering decent seats, the airlines doing so are effectively at a competitive disadvantage compared to the ones which don't. This needs to change.
Only recently have aggregators started disclosing bag charges, which could be significant, especially with low-cost airlines (WOW, Norwegian, AirBerlin) outcompeting everyone else on basic ticket fare and appearing high in the results.
Now realistically airlines aren't thieves, they generally have a hard time with their profit margins, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be severely regulated.
No need to be redundant.
I’m all for critiquing politics ideologies, I’m a social democrat and I think it’s valuable to find flaws and improve them, but this is a very silly “critique” of libertarianism that just doesn’t hold up to any scrutiny.
I am also sympathetic to the libertarian impulse (competition will fix it!), but as you pointed out, heavy regulation likely prevents that. I'm sure that there are SOME airline regulations we can safely roll back, but how many, and would this actually have a measurable impact on the competitive landscape? (Serious question!) I suspect that there is some regulatory capture going on, but it isn't likely to be visible except to industry insiders.
First of all there's the evacuation angle. Regulations require the ability to evacuate the plane within 90 seconds, using only half of the exits. And by "evacuate" they don't mean people lined up at the door waiting to get off -- they mean the order to evacuate is given, and then 90 seconds later there is nobody left inside the plane.
There's a strong argument to be made that this is no longer physically possible with high-density seat configurations. The tests for this are already unrealistic (they involve people who are told in advance what's going to happen, who know they aren't in danger, who don't face any issues such as smoke to confuse them, and who have no particular attachment to each other or to any baggage in the cabin), and as those tests have remained static their detachment from reality has grown.
The second issue is survivability in an economy-class seat. This diagram is instructive:
That's used by airlines... for flight crew seats. It lays out an area to be kept free of obstructions, as anything in that area could cause devastating head or neck injuries in an accident (due to the seat's occupant being jerked suddenly and their head sweeping through that area). The diagram notes the area is 35 inches deep, but it's easy to miss an important point: the 35 inches is measured from the front of the seat cushion to the rear edge of any object in front of the seat. For passengers, airlines measure pitch from the rear edge of one seat to the rear edge of the next, meaning a 30-inch pitch (typical for US economy class) is not 5 inches (35 - 30) short of the safety margin, it's more like 8 or even 10 inches short depending on the depth of the seat cushions and frame.
There are court cases going right now over whether the FAA is inappropriately ignoring safety concerns. A victory in court would, as a side effect, probably make flying more comfortable but also slightly more expensive.
Also, I seem to remember that decades ago, when you flew, the instructions used to be that if the aircraft was expected to crash you were supposed to bend over and put your head between your knees for protection during the crash. Did they give that up because it was ineffective advice or because seat pitch no longer permits it?
Also, crew seats don't always face backwards.
That's a marketing gag to establish the airline as low budget. Ryanair did the same thing some years ago.
Such seats would need to get approved by the FAA and I'm pretty sure they haven't been.
This is only because airlines are not obliged to -- or have not yet engaged in a marketing war with each other by -- advertising seat dimensions, either during the booking process, or via more general marketing.
I expect it'd be more useful, way more effective, and naturally less cost, to do it during the booking phase. While this may seem like it'd risk losing customers, word of mouth is powerful in this sector.
A succinct addenda such as 'compared to Xyz airline that has 50mm less space', and a hover-over picture that shows someone being annoyed by the less spacious seat, perhaps being served a meal of dubious origin by someone wearing Xyz uniform, just to drive it home. I should be in advertising.
(My understanding is that 'attack' advertising is more acceptable within the US. Here in AU we're unlikely to see this kind of thing due to a dearth of carrier choice. No idea about other parts of the world.)
Arguably we will eventually reach some level of service that is so unbelievably crappy that people will be willing to pay more to avoid it, but the success of the low cost carriers suggests to me that we're not there yet.
It'd be an interesting experiment for airlines to kit out planes to include a range of economy seat sizes, with minor price differences.
Claims that this would be overly complex are discounted by observing there's a half dozen variations of ticket classes already, including sub-categories of economy.
Matching seat sizes to people's heights would be the pinnacle of social planning -- as a 188cm tall person, walking past exit row seats occupied by people whose legs don't touch the floor rankles every time.
Virgin absolutely has an image edge because of their reputation for service. My Canadian friends hate Air Canada's reliability apparently, but it's such an upgrade vs the US majors for me that I go out of my way to choose Air Canada when I'm making a trip up North. Hopefully these things will start to matter more...
> Makes sense, seat space isn't really
> something you consider when shopping
> for plane tickets
If it's only a few hours, sure, not a big difference. But when I fly Melbourne-London, premium economy is a difference between being a zombie for the next 48h, or arriving just tired. How much is the day after travel worth for you?
Someone should create a travel site like Kayak with a lot more details about the airline you're flying - how often they are late, CSAT score (can be bogus, I know), seating room, etc.
The old adage is that you can't manage what you don't measure, I'd love to see this stuff quantified every time I search so that I can manage my travel/money better.
* Pay for the toilet
* Standing 'seats'
* Allow customers to watch porn
Probably others I've forgotten. They've even admitted they are marketing stunts.
They do gain revenue from upselling "premium economy".
However recently when I was flying I had a neighbour who was quite big. Not even obese but just big shoulders.
His arms simply didn't fit within his arm rests so part of his shoulder was inside my seat area. There was nothing else for me to do than bend to the side of my seat. Not very pleasant, especially since this was a 5 hour flight.
I joke to my 6"4 friend when we fly together that this is the one time that being my height (5"8) is better than his :P
Airlines need to start reserving the aisle or bulkhead seats for taller passengers or something, this isn't sustainable otherwise.
Isn’t this what premium economy is for? I’ve seen it for as little as 10% extra.
And they simply don't sell them on Bombardier CRJs that I normally fly.
But then the question is where does it stop, cos then little people get almost a bed while I'm getting just a seat.
I did once receive an aggressive harangue from the passenger in front on a short flight (~2 hours IIRC) about how he'd paid for his seat and had a right to recline it, but unfortunately for us both I was in the middle of a row on that occasion and had nowhere to put my knees but the back of his seat, and they touched that before he even started to recline it. This had to be resolved by the cabin crew moving me to another seat.
I fit well in a regular airline seat. Why should I pay more because a fatter or taller person wants to sit more comfortably in an airplane without paying extra for a seat in economy plus designed for that exact purpose?
But as I said, if the variation in humans is really that large, then charging a linear combination for depth/weight based on actual costs would be completely understandable.
For the current state, let's take a quick look at say United . A regular ticket from BOS to LAX is $139, which is in line with the general range one would expect to pay . The upgrade to "Economy Plus" is $99. So for a pitch increase of 20%, the price is 70% more?! This is price discrimination based on immutable physical qualities - straight up gouging.
 I chose what I thought would be the worst offender here
 and has been roughly the price for well over a decade, disregarding the new bag fees
Every major airline gives the option of paying 10%-20% more and getting THE SEAT PITCH THAT USED TO BE STANDARD A DECADE AGO.
I'm 6'6" and it's gotten to the point that the emergency row seats are getting tight (other than the one directly next to the hatch itself).
I'm 5'4" / 163 cm tall. In other words I'm short. Even my knees are touching the seat in front of me sometimes. Even I've had a passenger in front of me bash my knees when they reclined. How in the world anybody taller than me manages, I have no idea.
Air New Zealand (and I think some Chinese airline) also have a program where if you're traveling as a group of two, there are special rows in economy where you can buy out the middle seat for less than it would normally cost. These rows also have locking fold up extensions that fill the space between your seat and the seat in front, so if you and your partner are both pretty small and extremely friendly, you can both sleep lying down.
If you're overweight to the point that you overflow into the neighboring seats some airlines mandate you buy two seats: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/35406030/ns/travel-news/t/oversize....
RIP Good Days.
3-4-3 in a 747 feels quite comfortable, but I would certainly not like it on any smaller plane.