Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Adults Only: European Airline Introduces Child-Free Areas on Long-Haul Flights (bloomberg.com)
61 points by pg_1234 9 months ago | hide | past | favorite | 55 comments



I would be interested in the following other types of special flights:

- Flights where no one is a first-time traveller, in fact you must have flown at least 20 times.

- Flights with no overhead bins at all.


Airlines could easily solve the overhead delay issue by adopting their carry-on price structure for checked bags, they simply don't want to.

Either way I'd still do carry-on even with a bag fee. Every time I've trusted an airline to handle bags they manage to violate that trust in new and exciting ways.


On a majority of flights that I'm on, someone always happens to sit in the wrong seat. Inevitably, a flight attendant then has to come over, usually against the flow of boarding passengers to sort out the situation.

I don't know how to improve upon the existing signage. Maybe have a personalized interactive experience? When your ticket is scanned, lights in the floor guide you to your exact seat.


All the seatback screens could display the seat number in large writing during boarding. Those without screens could have a simple placard with the seat number.


Seat number and the passenger's face!


Why do to have to do more than say, "my ticket says 24C and you are sitting in my seat" ?


Not on an airline, but in a movie theater: I was sitting in a pre-purchased, assigned aisle seat in an auditorium with about 4 other souls present. I had commandeered the seat next to me and laid down my hat, phone, food and drink.

Well an old lady on her own comes right up to me, a little before the film starts, and she indicates that's her seat. So I thought, okay weird, she purchased a seat right next to an occupied one? Whatever. So I bail out all my stuff and I just lay it on the ground. She seems apologetic.

Then like 10 minutes later, her husband shows up, sits two seats away, and tells her she sat in the wrong seat. LOL! ... I did not return my belongings to the cursed seat. Also, it turned out to be a cursed and blasphemous film, one of the worst I've ever seen.


Also, it turned out to be a cursed and blasphemous film, one of the worst I've ever seen.

By any chance was it Hypnotic?


It probably wasn't Ken Russell's The Devils (1971) despite being a better descriptive fit and arguably better film.


It's probably a rule written somewhere but here it goes, any part of a process that relies on humans to cooperate is guaranteed trouble.


> Flights with no overhead bins at all.

I completely disagree about this one. I'm not checking all my essentials, because there's a good chance the luggage will get lost (esp. if it's an American airline).

The solution for your problem here is that passengers need to get a test and a license: they need to demonstrate that they can very quickly stick their luggage into the overhead compartment and sit down when boarding, and very quickly get up, grab their bag, and start walking down the aisle when disembarking ("deplaning"... ugh). Half the passengers would fail this test every time, so those people should be kept in a separate part of the plane and charged extra for wasting everyone's time.


You can put your essentials under the seat in front of you.


No, you can't: that's for your "personal item". It's big enough for a small backpack with a laptop and a few other things, and that's about it. Certainly not for a couple days worth of clothes and toiletries.


I'm going to disagree with you there. I took a lot of trips on Ryanair recently, and since they charge for overhead bin use, I kept everything under the seat in front of me. I was able to fit everything I needed (toiletries, clothes, laptop) for four days in a backpack under the seat in front of me.


Ok fine, I suppose you can somehow make it fit if you pack only the bare essentials. I don't feel like it though: why should I? I don't fly RyanAir and I can use the overhead bin for free, so that's what I'm going to do. I can usually bring all the luggage I need for my entire trip carry-on and fit it in the overhead bin and under the seat (two bags, one large, one small), so that's what I do.


It's big enough - I've put my backpack filled with a weeks clothes for BOTH my husband and I plus my laptop under the seat in front of me.


>- Flights where no one is a first-time traveller, in fact you must have flown at least 20 times.

Can we expand that from flights to airports? And have 'training airports' for people to learn on?


And a tasering for anyone standing close to the baggage carousel without their bag in sight ready to pick up.


and the ones who leap from their seats the moment the plane touches down.


Also board from back to front. Yes first class has to wait, but it would save so much time. Even if they boarded first class then did the rest of the plane back to front it would speed up loading by like a good 10 minutes most likely.


Boarding back to front is one of the worst ways to board and is significantly worse than boarding randomly [1].

[1] https://lss.fnal.gov/archive/2011/pub/fermilab-pub-11-402-ae...


The airplane would flip


must have flown at least 5 times outside of a holiday weekend for leisure


As a parent, I'd be interested in family friendly long haul flights. Book rows together like what Air New Zealand has, have a designated play area where all the kids can get together and go nuts.

I forget which airline it is, Emirates maybe?, you can hand your kid over to the flight attendant for 20 or 30 minutes so you can go to the toilet, have a quick meal, etc. which is very handy if you're travelling as a single parent.


Etihad (similar to emirates) used to offer flying nanny’s. That seemed more like a feature for people in the front end of the plane though.


if it isn’t a child-free plane, the child-free areas are the cockpit (once the door is shut) and the cargo hold (hopefully always.)

anyone who thinks a curtain can contain the sounds and/or smells of a toddler has never had one.

and if you think children (or animals) are the only nuisance on planes, you’re likely the other kind.


An upset child 20 rows away is massive better than an upset child next to me.


cool, let’s sub that <100lb child with a >200lb adult. upset, naturally.

happy?


Yeah actually, that’s much better. Adults have consequences, feel shame when people glare at them, and can be kicked off the flight before take off.

I sit down on a flight, I roll with anything that goes wrong, and just focus on getting to where I’m going, like 80% of most adults on a plane. Babies on the other hand, I’m pretty sure that’s 0% of them with that sort of attitude.


Well, unless you can afford to fly private, you’re just going to have to deal with the annoying babies. Because families need to get to places and the human race isn’t going to go extinct, at least not anytime soon.

In the meantime, I’d recommend investing in a good pair of earbuds and/or headphones.


That's optimistic: you're commenting under an article which suggests they might not have to deal with the annoying babies for long.

Families should not take their ability to "get to places" for granted. If the people who don't want "annoying babies" on their planes accumulate enough disposable income that catering to their desires becomes more profitable than catering to families, the latter may find themselves out of luck when they "need to get to places", unless they themselves can afford to fly private.

Of course, that's an extreme extrapolation; but on the margin, the introduction of child-free zones will certainly make air travel for families less affordable. If it turns out profitable, potentially by a lot.


Very scary stuff. Families will probably soon have to drive over the Atlantic.


Yeah, hilarious, but in reality they just won't go.

Just like e.g. most Indians never fly to the U.S. even if they have relatives living there. Or more fittingly, how most Hungarians used to be able to afford to go on a holiday near Lake Balaton until they were priced out by wealthier Germans, or middle-class families in Canberra used to be able to afford daycare but now only the top 3% by income do.

I would not hold my breath about the state subsidizing cross-Atlantic trips for families.


> but in reality they just won't go.

Sounds like a beautiful dream! Emergencies happen. Grandparents & relatives exist. Parents will still want to show their kids how vast & beautiful the world is.

Could it get more expensive to travel? Sure. But families will continue to travel, and annoyed passengers will continue to deal with it. C'est la vie.


Again, you're commenting under an article which shows that some airlines are betting the annoyed passengers will not continue to deal with it.

If you claim to believe that "families are able to travel by air in a. case of emergency", "grandparents can afford to see their grandchildren" and "most children get to see how vast and beautiful the world is" somehow follow from Newton's laws, even though we just had a two-year period with major loss of access to air travel, well... I'll leave you to your beautiful dream.


I always go on vacation outside the school holiday season.

Mostly gays and older people in the plane and hotel.


300 lb people in the center aisle with their VR headset on might not feel shame.


oh goodness i do hope your luck holds.


And I hope you find a little optimism in your life! You’re saying that in your experience, greater than 20% of adults on a flight are more problematic and annoying than a crying kid?

I like to think I’m pretty realistic about things but I don’t ever think it’s been that bad for me! I might even go as far as to say that most of my flights have had no issues.


>You’re saying that in your experience, greater than 20% of adults on a flight are more problematic and annoying than a crying kid?

It depends on how many Americans are on board.


then why so concerned about children? you seem to be optimistic about everything else.


Perfect is the enemy of good


false advertising is the enemy of both.


South Korea tried this with restaurants: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/06/24/asia/south-korea-no-kids-...

I do wonder if such policies are a cause or a symptom of a dying/declining society that can’t figure out how to propagate under existing norms.


Yeah. I mean I am of two minds here. We flew to Mexico City a while ago with two young children, not complete babies but the youngest was still in diapers. We were THOSE parents with THOSE kid. No running around or kicking but they just could not stop crying. Small ear canals. Change of pressure. Too painful.

On the other hand when we have traveled in heavily Spanish areas I’ve noticed most everyone was completely cool with the sounds of children. It’s just life and life is good. People would offer to have them sit with them and feed them so you can get a break. Complete strangers.

I’d rather be the latter culture than the former. But we’ve no real unified cultural expectations in the US. A major problem. A great strength. I dunno anymore


A crying child right next to me is difficult, but I've never blamed the parents. A crying child a couple rows away? Somehow relaxing to know someone else is having a worse flight than I am. (Either the kid or the parent.) It's just not the end of the world, and its temporary for both of us. Easier (for me) to accept than an adult playing a video without headphones.


As a parent, I welcome this.

Although a child-free area on a plane sounds about as effective as a non-peeing area in a public pool.


Oh, I would love if they charge a lot for this and subsidize the price of my ticket in economy. I wear noise cancellation headphones on flights anyway.

The last flight I was on I saw two infants in first class not having a good day. I can imagine those who paid for first class were not happy. I thought about asking the flight attendant if anyone wanted to trade for my economy seat but decided against it. I didn’t want to annoy the flight attendant mostly.


Noise cancelling headphones do nothing for some kid kicking your seat from behind or a kid so squirmy he can't stay within the confines of his seat.


I’ve more frequently encountered adults who are too large encroaching into my seat, which irritates me more. My last experience was sitting between two extremely large body builders on a red eye.

But sure, if that happens that could be annoying too.



Noise canceling headphones can solve so many problems on an airplane. The noise canceling in AirPods Max made the price worth it... even after Apple reduced the effectiveness because they got sued for patent infringement. Far better spend than whatever elevated ticket price they'll be charging.

One click of a button and your crying baby becomes solely _your_ problem. :P


A crying baby can be distressing or distracting, but a giggling babbling baby brings a smile to my face. I say take the good with the bad.


Now that they're allowed to discriminate on immutable characteristics, what's next?


Age is pretty mutable (until death).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: