A hex on your hexagonal airline seating!
July 14, 2015 9:16 AM Subscribe
The suggested patent on hexagonal seating. Airlines love the idea of cramming more people into a plane, despite the horror of potentially being forced into eye contact and even closer proximity to strangers.
Has anyone patented the idea of stacking passengers into the fuselage like fire-wood yet?
posted by Poldo at 9:20 AM on July 14, 2015 [54 favorites]
posted by Poldo at 9:20 AM on July 14, 2015 [54 favorites]
The Mile High Club possibilities are, however, something to consider. This solution might make it hard to not have sex while traveling.
posted by chavenet at 9:21 AM on July 14, 2015 [15 favorites]
posted by chavenet at 9:21 AM on July 14, 2015 [15 favorites]
I suddenly realized what this seating configuration reminded me of.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:21 AM on July 14, 2015 [21 favorites]
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:21 AM on July 14, 2015 [21 favorites]
I'm generally pretty OK with sharing space with strangers, but face-to-face for hours? Oh hell no.
Isn't the avoidance of this horrifying scenario what all the free newspapers they give out at train stations are really for?
posted by dng at 9:22 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
Isn't the avoidance of this horrifying scenario what all the free newspapers they give out at train stations are really for?
posted by dng at 9:22 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
I'll repeat what I have said elsewhere: How do you get up to pee if you're not on an aisle?
posted by djeo at 9:23 AM on July 14, 2015 [5 favorites]
posted by djeo at 9:23 AM on July 14, 2015 [5 favorites]
This will never be a thing. There's no way passengers could safely evacuate their "row" in a configuration like this because the main space savings in the design comes from occupying row space not utilized in the current straight row design. Not to mention that you'd have people crashing into each other rather than all heading in the same direction as they scramble to get out.
posted by allkindsoftime at 9:24 AM on July 14, 2015 [42 favorites]
posted by allkindsoftime at 9:24 AM on July 14, 2015 [42 favorites]
I could deal with this if all passengers were issued complimentary VR helmets.
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:25 AM on July 14, 2015 [5 favorites]
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:25 AM on July 14, 2015 [5 favorites]
at what point in human history did we slip from the cool awesome future timeline to this shitty awful future timeline and how can we go back and kill whoever needs a-killin in order to MAKE IT FUCKING STOP
posted by poffin boffin at 9:25 AM on July 14, 2015 [78 favorites]
posted by poffin boffin at 9:25 AM on July 14, 2015 [78 favorites]
It's not enough that the TSA gets to put their hands in my crotch, now the airlines want other passengers to do it? Thanks, no.
posted by Etrigan at 9:25 AM on July 14, 2015 [8 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 9:25 AM on July 14, 2015 [8 favorites]
How do you get up to pee if you're not on an aisle?
You gin up the courage to ask your seatmates to let you through to do your business. They comply because the alternative to not letting you through is much, much worse for them.
posted by asperity at 9:26 AM on July 14, 2015 [12 favorites]
You gin up the courage to ask your seatmates to let you through to do your business. They comply because the alternative to not letting you through is much, much worse for them.
posted by asperity at 9:26 AM on July 14, 2015 [12 favorites]
As if the middle seat didn't suck enough, sitting reverse? UGH.
Flip the seat up, djeo. Everyone stands.
But agreeing with allkindsoftime ... there's no way this can be made safe for evacuating.
Patent =/= executable in the real world.
posted by tilde at 9:26 AM on July 14, 2015
Flip the seat up, djeo. Everyone stands.
But agreeing with allkindsoftime ... there's no way this can be made safe for evacuating.
Patent =/= executable in the real world.
posted by tilde at 9:26 AM on July 14, 2015
on a less screamy ragepanic level this doesn't seem like it would be compliant with ADA regs.
posted by poffin boffin at 9:26 AM on July 14, 2015 [11 favorites]
posted by poffin boffin at 9:26 AM on July 14, 2015 [11 favorites]
Has anyone patented the idea of stacking passengers into the fuselage like fire-wood yet?
For long flights, I wouldn't mind what they did in the 5th element: sedate passengers and stack them in sleeping pods.
posted by Sangermaine at 9:28 AM on July 14, 2015 [29 favorites]
For long flights, I wouldn't mind what they did in the 5th element: sedate passengers and stack them in sleeping pods.
posted by Sangermaine at 9:28 AM on July 14, 2015 [29 favorites]
This could work ok if they added heroin to the in-flight menu.
posted by oceanjesse at 9:29 AM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
posted by oceanjesse at 9:29 AM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
How do you get up to pee if you're not on an aisle?
And if you do get up, you're probably gonna get something like this.
posted by The Bellman at 9:32 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
And if you do get up, you're probably gonna get something like this.
posted by The Bellman at 9:32 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
Some mid-level engineer just got his $500 patent bonus guys.
THis is never getting built.
Simmer down.
posted by GuyZero at 9:32 AM on July 14, 2015 [33 favorites]
THis is never getting built.
Simmer down.
posted by GuyZero at 9:32 AM on July 14, 2015 [33 favorites]
This is so fascinatingly nightmarish. But not fascinating I would enjoy it. Airlines are already planning to make the toilets smaller but I think they forget we are not stackable dolls.
posted by Kitteh at 9:33 AM on July 14, 2015
posted by Kitteh at 9:33 AM on July 14, 2015
But agreeing with allkindsoftime ... there's no way this can be made safe for evacuating.
More importantly, if you increase the capacity of a 737-800 from 170 to 230 with this, you're going to need to add at least two doors, which is a *major* modification.
The FAA rule -- everybody has to be able to get off in 90 seconds. The number of people onboard basically determines how many doors and exit windows a plane has to have. Increase the number of seats, and you increase the number of doors. And, also, the number of flight attendants.
Also, when you add all these people and these doors, that makes the plane heavier. That means you carry less fuel. That means you don't go as far, and you carry less cargo. On short haul, may not be a factor, but on longhauls, big fail.
This is, what, the fifth or sixth idea for how to cram more people onto an airplane that fails to recognize that there are other factors than simple space into cramming more people onto an airplane?
It's like the annual "I've designed a better boarding pass" post, which fails to recognize that the board pass is *not* made for the passenger, it's made for the gate agent, and printing the gate on it is a bad idea because that changes all the time, and really, the smart thing to do is *not* to print the gate on it so you'll go look at the boards which update in real time, not the piece of paper, which doesn't, or get an app and not have a static piece of paper at all.
So, yeah, THIS IDEA IS BAD AND THEY SHOULD FEEL BAD.
posted by eriko at 9:34 AM on July 14, 2015 [82 favorites]
More importantly, if you increase the capacity of a 737-800 from 170 to 230 with this, you're going to need to add at least two doors, which is a *major* modification.
The FAA rule -- everybody has to be able to get off in 90 seconds. The number of people onboard basically determines how many doors and exit windows a plane has to have. Increase the number of seats, and you increase the number of doors. And, also, the number of flight attendants.
Also, when you add all these people and these doors, that makes the plane heavier. That means you carry less fuel. That means you don't go as far, and you carry less cargo. On short haul, may not be a factor, but on longhauls, big fail.
This is, what, the fifth or sixth idea for how to cram more people onto an airplane that fails to recognize that there are other factors than simple space into cramming more people onto an airplane?
It's like the annual "I've designed a better boarding pass" post, which fails to recognize that the board pass is *not* made for the passenger, it's made for the gate agent, and printing the gate on it is a bad idea because that changes all the time, and really, the smart thing to do is *not* to print the gate on it so you'll go look at the boards which update in real time, not the piece of paper, which doesn't, or get an app and not have a static piece of paper at all.
So, yeah, THIS IDEA IS BAD AND THEY SHOULD FEEL BAD.
posted by eriko at 9:34 AM on July 14, 2015 [82 favorites]
this is how business class looks on a lot of carriers but there are WALL BARRIERS between passengers and there are only two to a row section and you get to lie down
this setup compared to those is a pair of plastic slide-on flipflops that say NIEK instead of some manolo painted cork flats
posted by poffin boffin at 9:34 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
this setup compared to those is a pair of plastic slide-on flipflops that say NIEK instead of some manolo painted cork flats
posted by poffin boffin at 9:34 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
This will never be a thing. There's no way passengers could safely evacuate their "row" in a configuration like this because the main space savings in the design comes from occupying row space not utilized in the current straight row design. Not to mention that you'd have people crashing into each other rather than all heading in the same direction as they scramble to get out.
I wouldn't think people would put up with the current hunched over nerve-pincing security musical situation but cheap, available air flight is still attractive enough and expected enough and necessary enough that people have yet to hit a breaking point
posted by The Whelk at 9:35 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
I wouldn't think people would put up with the current hunched over nerve-pincing security musical situation but cheap, available air flight is still attractive enough and expected enough and necessary enough that people have yet to hit a breaking point
posted by The Whelk at 9:35 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
This looks like the same pattern used to pack sardines.
posted by I-Write-Essays at 9:36 AM on July 14, 2015
posted by I-Write-Essays at 9:36 AM on July 14, 2015
I have never gotten airsick before but I think I would be terribly, violently ill if I had to ride backwards for hours and I don't think my gastrointestinal pyrotechnics would make for a pleasant flight for the person staring at my face the whole time.
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 9:37 AM on July 14, 2015 [8 favorites]
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 9:37 AM on July 14, 2015 [8 favorites]
in a perfect world we would find the person responsible for this and Make An Example of them
posted by poffin boffin at 9:39 AM on July 14, 2015 [11 favorites]
posted by poffin boffin at 9:39 AM on July 14, 2015 [11 favorites]
One thing that is actually good about this design is that it maximizes shoulder space for everyone while also making it very hard to use your knees to intrude on another person's space. Shoulders are, I think, the biggest problem points as they try to squeeze more and more seats onto planes. I have pretty broad shoulders myself but I see the real linebacker types having to spend the whole flight hunched forward to keep from intruding into their neighbor's space.
I don't think there's any possibility that this will ever be implemented: the social proxemics problems (as evidenced by this thread) would create too much resistance. But there are definitely ways in which this would be physically more comfortable if psychically less so.
posted by yoink at 9:39 AM on July 14, 2015 [13 favorites]
I don't think there's any possibility that this will ever be implemented: the social proxemics problems (as evidenced by this thread) would create too much resistance. But there are definitely ways in which this would be physically more comfortable if psychically less so.
posted by yoink at 9:39 AM on July 14, 2015 [13 favorites]
I'd ride the hell out of that.
Allegiant can save me thirty bucks getting me from Bellingham to Palm Springs for a hundred bucks return? And you all are complaining about our dystopian future because you may have to make eye contact with another human being? Some people are never happy.
posted by Keith Talent at 9:40 AM on July 14, 2015 [4 favorites]
Allegiant can save me thirty bucks getting me from Bellingham to Palm Springs for a hundred bucks return? And you all are complaining about our dystopian future because you may have to make eye contact with another human being? Some people are never happy.
posted by Keith Talent at 9:40 AM on July 14, 2015 [4 favorites]
Didn't we just have a worst ever airline seating patent ever thing last year? I prefer this at least to the bicycle seat idea. Either one will probably get built at some point. The recent market trend seems to show that passengers will give up basically everything to save a few bucks in airfare.
posted by Popular Ethics at 9:40 AM on July 14, 2015
posted by Popular Ethics at 9:40 AM on July 14, 2015
No. No no. No no no no.
I do remember when I was a little kid, my family used to occasionally fly on some sort of aircraft that in my memory had just one row of seats facing the opposite direction of everyone else. I think it was the first row in the cabin. My parents used to try to book that row and the next one so my four-person family could sit facing each other and talk/share stuff easily through the flight. I would beg to sit in the backwards row because I thought it was so cool being able to look at everyone else on the plane.
Nowadays being stared at by the whole plane for a whole flight is about the most horrifying thing I can imagine, so the only thing I can figure out is that at some point during my childhood I had some sort of head trauma that changed my personality dramatically.
posted by Stacey at 9:41 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
I do remember when I was a little kid, my family used to occasionally fly on some sort of aircraft that in my memory had just one row of seats facing the opposite direction of everyone else. I think it was the first row in the cabin. My parents used to try to book that row and the next one so my four-person family could sit facing each other and talk/share stuff easily through the flight. I would beg to sit in the backwards row because I thought it was so cool being able to look at everyone else on the plane.
Nowadays being stared at by the whole plane for a whole flight is about the most horrifying thing I can imagine, so the only thing I can figure out is that at some point during my childhood I had some sort of head trauma that changed my personality dramatically.
posted by Stacey at 9:41 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
I think I would be terribly, violently ill if I had to ride backwards for hours
That surprises me, because in the air you have so little sense of actual movement (it's not like on a train or in a car where you see the scenery whipping past the window all the time. I've always been surprised that seats don't face backwards on planes (other than for the cabin crew) because it seems obvious that that would be better in a crash.
posted by yoink at 9:41 AM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
That surprises me, because in the air you have so little sense of actual movement (it's not like on a train or in a car where you see the scenery whipping past the window all the time. I've always been surprised that seats don't face backwards on planes (other than for the cabin crew) because it seems obvious that that would be better in a crash.
posted by yoink at 9:41 AM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
Personally, I'd rather just be hung from the ceiling by a meat hook. At least then I wouldn't get my knees and back pummeled.
posted by The Underpants Monster at 9:41 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by The Underpants Monster at 9:41 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
Oh man if only the TSA were required to perform the overture from Cats as they violated your personal space
Making the tedious and annoying into PURE NIGHTMARE.
Why can't we go back to the days of my youth, when long-distance consisted of being shot out of giant cannons? I mean, yes, you occasionally accidentally started a war when a passenger capsule went astray and hit a Head of State, but it was a small price to pay, I think, when I look at suggestions like these.
posted by GenjiandProust at 9:41 AM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
Making the tedious and annoying into PURE NIGHTMARE.
Why can't we go back to the days of my youth, when long-distance consisted of being shot out of giant cannons? I mean, yes, you occasionally accidentally started a war when a passenger capsule went astray and hit a Head of State, but it was a small price to pay, I think, when I look at suggestions like these.
posted by GenjiandProust at 9:41 AM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
...and you know what? If they did this, even though I think I would be violently ill for multiple hours, I would still totally take flights to other countries if I could afford them because I would really, really like to be able to travel. That's the problem; yeah, I would be sick for like six hours and it would SUCK, but then I'd have a week or however long in a place I'd never been before and that would stay with me for the rest of my life. Ugh, it's terrible to realize what dehumanizing shit you'd do to have awesome new experiences and also how quickly and easily it would probably seem normal.
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 9:42 AM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 9:42 AM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
It's not so much "oh no, eye contact" as the potential for the fixed glassy-eyed stare of someone who wants to be Sky Friends persisting for six hours or more
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:42 AM on July 14, 2015 [28 favorites]
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:42 AM on July 14, 2015 [28 favorites]
There was an early Piers Anthony novel in which a group of space travelers used an alien technology to dissolve and completely liquefy their bodies for travel so they could survive extreme acceleration, and then were reconstructed at the other end. (naturally this required a lengthy scene of everyone extensively groping each others' naked bodies so they could be sure they were really "them" when they came out at the other end.)
This would seem to me the most cost-effective way to utilize space in the plane. You would literally just pump people into a sealed and pressurized tank, and there would be no wasted volume at all. We should be working on this.
posted by Naberius at 9:45 AM on July 14, 2015 [7 favorites]
This would seem to me the most cost-effective way to utilize space in the plane. You would literally just pump people into a sealed and pressurized tank, and there would be no wasted volume at all. We should be working on this.
posted by Naberius at 9:45 AM on July 14, 2015 [7 favorites]
I've always been surprised that seats don't face backwards on planes
British Airways business class has backward-facing seats, and they're completely fine.
posted by bonaldi at 9:46 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
British Airways business class has backward-facing seats, and they're completely fine.
posted by bonaldi at 9:46 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
(NB They have a privacy screen so you don't need to see a forward-facing person beside you if you don't want to)
posted by bonaldi at 9:47 AM on July 14, 2015
posted by bonaldi at 9:47 AM on July 14, 2015
also this layout would definitely encourage gropers and creepers to target anyone wearing a skirt, or basically anyone with a crotch.
posted by poffin boffin at 9:48 AM on July 14, 2015 [10 favorites]
posted by poffin boffin at 9:48 AM on July 14, 2015 [10 favorites]
The recent market trend seems to show that passengers will give up basically everything to save a few bucks in airfare.
I feel like I hear this kind of dismissive tone in a lot of conversations about airline flights, as if it's totally unreasonable for people with tight budgets to want to travel, and it really bothers me (not trying to pick on you, this is just the most recent example of something I encounter a lot). There are tons of reasons people fly -- seeing family, work, school, vacation, whatever -- and the more it costs the less often you can do these things. I don't think it's unreasonable to preserve the financial resources you have so that you can actually have experiences you enjoy.
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 9:48 AM on July 14, 2015 [30 favorites]
I feel like I hear this kind of dismissive tone in a lot of conversations about airline flights, as if it's totally unreasonable for people with tight budgets to want to travel, and it really bothers me (not trying to pick on you, this is just the most recent example of something I encounter a lot). There are tons of reasons people fly -- seeing family, work, school, vacation, whatever -- and the more it costs the less often you can do these things. I don't think it's unreasonable to preserve the financial resources you have so that you can actually have experiences you enjoy.
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 9:48 AM on July 14, 2015 [30 favorites]
(NB They have a privacy screen so you don't need to see a forward-facing person beside you if you don't want to)
They also fold down completely flat so you can sleep, and they give you pretty much all the booze you want.
Not really the same thing.
posted by eriko at 9:49 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
They also fold down completely flat so you can sleep, and they give you pretty much all the booze you want.
Not really the same thing.
posted by eriko at 9:49 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
also this layout would definitely encourage gropers and creepers to target anyone wearing a skirt, or basically anyone with a crotch.
First Class
Business Class
Economy Class
Hi Whatcha Reading Class
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:50 AM on July 14, 2015 [30 favorites]
First Class
Business Class
Economy Class
Hi Whatcha Reading Class
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:50 AM on July 14, 2015 [30 favorites]
More importantly, if you increase the capacity of a 737-800 from 170 to 230 with this, you're going to need to add at least two doors, which is a *major* modification.
Ah, but what if you only apply it to the cheap seats, leaving you more room for even more luxurious first class seating while still having the same number of economy passengers? The passenger count stays the same (or only increases very modestly) while the first class passengers get a third more space.
posted by jedicus at 9:50 AM on July 14, 2015 [4 favorites]
Ah, but what if you only apply it to the cheap seats, leaving you more room for even more luxurious first class seating while still having the same number of economy passengers? The passenger count stays the same (or only increases very modestly) while the first class passengers get a third more space.
posted by jedicus at 9:50 AM on July 14, 2015 [4 favorites]
I have never gotten airsick before but I think I would be terribly, violently ill if I had to ride backwards for hours
I've ridden backwards for awhile, and it's not so bad. The plane I work on has reversible crew seats to increase crash safety - you ride backwards for takeoff and landing. The bigger problem I had was that the main cabin has no windows so there is absolutely no way to look outside and orient yourself, and when you're doing racetracks and figure eights for hours of flight testing it can get really disorienting.
posted by backseatpilot at 9:51 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
I've ridden backwards for awhile, and it's not so bad. The plane I work on has reversible crew seats to increase crash safety - you ride backwards for takeoff and landing. The bigger problem I had was that the main cabin has no windows so there is absolutely no way to look outside and orient yourself, and when you're doing racetracks and figure eights for hours of flight testing it can get really disorienting.
posted by backseatpilot at 9:51 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
In 2006, there were rumors of standing-only plane configurations. I enjoyed Bruce McCall’s take at the time, but as a Southwest fan I do like anything that gets me on and off a plane faster. The hexagon seats seem like a neat solution to the neighbor-eyeballing-your-laptop-screen problem, but they also look like they’d take longer to load.
posted by migurski at 9:53 AM on July 14, 2015
posted by migurski at 9:53 AM on July 14, 2015
As airline seating gets less and less comfortable, the argument tends to go that if you really care about the extra space and can afford it, just pay for the "extra legroom" seats or first class. This way its the best of both worlds -- people who care only about price can get cheap flights, and people who prioritize comfort over cost can pay more and get a better experience.
That all sounds fine in theory, but it ignores the fact that those of us who travel regularly for business are frequently forced by company policy to use the "cheapest logical fare" (and the company's "logic" does not extend to the traveler's comfort). So as the cheapest seats get worse and worse, business travelers are subjected to them, with the only benefit of saving their employer money, and often little option of paying more for something better. The company could easily afford to pay slightly more, but many will not. Not everyone actually has a choice.
I'm personally "lucky" enough (not sure that's the right word) that I travel so much for work that I've earned elite status on several airlines, so I can get the marginally better seats for free. But the ongoing worsening of the lowest price seats really sucks for many business travelers.
posted by primethyme at 9:53 AM on July 14, 2015 [13 favorites]
That all sounds fine in theory, but it ignores the fact that those of us who travel regularly for business are frequently forced by company policy to use the "cheapest logical fare" (and the company's "logic" does not extend to the traveler's comfort). So as the cheapest seats get worse and worse, business travelers are subjected to them, with the only benefit of saving their employer money, and often little option of paying more for something better. The company could easily afford to pay slightly more, but many will not. Not everyone actually has a choice.
I'm personally "lucky" enough (not sure that's the right word) that I travel so much for work that I've earned elite status on several airlines, so I can get the marginally better seats for free. But the ongoing worsening of the lowest price seats really sucks for many business travelers.
posted by primethyme at 9:53 AM on July 14, 2015 [13 favorites]
poffin boffin: in a perfect world we would find the person responsible for this and Make An Example of them
I'm not going to dox the guy, but his name and address is on the patent that is linked in the first article (On Preview, Too late). Have fun in France!
posted by achrise at 9:53 AM on July 14, 2015
posted by achrise at 9:53 AM on July 14, 2015
in a perfect world we would find the person responsible for this and Make An Example of them
You can patent things that would be impossible to build due to physical constraints and things that would be illegal to build due to regulatory reasons.
Really, people.
posted by GuyZero at 9:54 AM on July 14, 2015 [8 favorites]
You can patent things that would be impossible to build due to physical constraints and things that would be illegal to build due to regulatory reasons.
Really, people.
posted by GuyZero at 9:54 AM on July 14, 2015 [8 favorites]
Some mid-level engineer Creative Design Manager just got his $500 patent bonus guys.
posted by achrise at 9:55 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by achrise at 9:55 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
or basically anyone with a crotch.
I, for, one welcome our new crotchless seatmates
posted by chavenet at 9:55 AM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
I, for, one welcome our new crotchless seatmates
posted by chavenet at 9:55 AM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
It looks like you would have more room for your shoulders and arms, I can get behind that.
This is never going to happen though: it would slow down emergency evacuation times too much.
posted by Bee'sWing at 9:56 AM on July 14, 2015
This is never going to happen though: it would slow down emergency evacuation times too much.
posted by Bee'sWing at 9:56 AM on July 14, 2015
Southwest definitely has (or at least had) the first row pointed backwards, and I got those seats whenever I could. Much more legroom.
posted by Navelgazer at 9:56 AM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by Navelgazer at 9:56 AM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
zodiac also designs the super high end luxury first class suite seats so it's like, we know you're capable of better things, why are you doing this.
i guess they could secretly be a revolutionary vanguard cell intent on fomenting class warfare
posted by poffin boffin at 10:00 AM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
i guess they could secretly be a revolutionary vanguard cell intent on fomenting class warfare
posted by poffin boffin at 10:00 AM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
I've always thought I should be able to disturb more people on my way to and from the bathroom.
posted by griphus at 10:01 AM on July 14, 2015 [14 favorites]
posted by griphus at 10:01 AM on July 14, 2015 [14 favorites]
The Southwest rear facing bulkhead seats were terrifying. I have no problem with flight anxiety, but take-off, with the steep angle, couples with the acceleration pulling you out of your seat, was horrible. It made you really appreciate the seatbelt.
posted by rtimmel at 10:02 AM on July 14, 2015
posted by rtimmel at 10:02 AM on July 14, 2015
Won't someone think of the Ultra-orthodox Jews?
posted by ZenMasterThis at 10:03 AM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
posted by ZenMasterThis at 10:03 AM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
Well, at least they haven't patented breaking arms and legs and folding the splintered bone to make space for more money meat...I mean passengers!
posted by oceanjesse at 10:04 AM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
posted by oceanjesse at 10:04 AM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
For long flights, I wouldn't mind what they did in the 5th element: sedate passengers and stack them in sleeping pods.
Sounds a lot like my plans for Anaesthesia Airways. Basically, the day of your flight, someone sneaks up behind you with a giant mallet, bops you over the head, and slips you into your travel canister, which is then rack-loaded into the plane. When you reach your destination, you're unloaded, delivered to your hotel, and put in bed. You wake up the next day, well-rested and refreshed, with a pleasant hole in your memory where all the air travel happened.
posted by sexyrobot at 10:05 AM on July 14, 2015 [13 favorites]
Sounds a lot like my plans for Anaesthesia Airways. Basically, the day of your flight, someone sneaks up behind you with a giant mallet, bops you over the head, and slips you into your travel canister, which is then rack-loaded into the plane. When you reach your destination, you're unloaded, delivered to your hotel, and put in bed. You wake up the next day, well-rested and refreshed, with a pleasant hole in your memory where all the air travel happened.
posted by sexyrobot at 10:05 AM on July 14, 2015 [13 favorites]
someone sneaks up behind you with a giant mallet, bops you over the head, and slips you into your travel canister, which is then rack-loaded into the plane.
Fifth Element did it! Absent the mallet, of course.
posted by Naberius at 10:08 AM on July 14, 2015
Fifth Element did it! Absent the mallet, of course.
posted by Naberius at 10:08 AM on July 14, 2015
Pretty sure this is a conspiracy by RyanAir to make their flying cattle cars look reasonable in comparison.
posted by bgal81 at 10:10 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by bgal81 at 10:10 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
You know what's even worse than increasing the chances of landing in a middle seat?
It's making passengers pay for the privilege of not traveling in a middle seat.
Yeah, that's what Air France is doing now... (and probably a number of other airlines, too). Here's what happened to me the other day:
I try to check in online about 24 h before take-off, only to find that all aisle and window seats are taken. Great. Oh, wait, there are a few here and there, but they want me to pay extra, by credit card, about 40 EUR for the privilege of not traveling middle seat. F*ck that.
On the next morning, at baggage drop-off, I whine to the check-in girl about how I really hate flying in a middle seat, and can't she pretty-please check once more if there isn't another seat available? Yes there is! Success! One of those seats next to the emergency exits, with extra leg-room (no row in front of you)! Finally on board, I discover that the dude next to me paid extra-extra (60 EUR? 80EUR?) for that extra leg-room.
F*ck you, Air France. I'm taking Lufthansa again next time, even if the tickets are 200 EUR more expensive to begin with.
Also, the food was more disgusting than usually.
posted by sour cream at 10:11 AM on July 14, 2015 [4 favorites]
It's making passengers pay for the privilege of not traveling in a middle seat.
Yeah, that's what Air France is doing now... (and probably a number of other airlines, too). Here's what happened to me the other day:
I try to check in online about 24 h before take-off, only to find that all aisle and window seats are taken. Great. Oh, wait, there are a few here and there, but they want me to pay extra, by credit card, about 40 EUR for the privilege of not traveling middle seat. F*ck that.
On the next morning, at baggage drop-off, I whine to the check-in girl about how I really hate flying in a middle seat, and can't she pretty-please check once more if there isn't another seat available? Yes there is! Success! One of those seats next to the emergency exits, with extra leg-room (no row in front of you)! Finally on board, I discover that the dude next to me paid extra-extra (60 EUR? 80EUR?) for that extra leg-room.
F*ck you, Air France. I'm taking Lufthansa again next time, even if the tickets are 200 EUR more expensive to begin with.
Also, the food was more disgusting than usually.
posted by sour cream at 10:11 AM on July 14, 2015 [4 favorites]
at what point in human history did we slip from the cool awesome future timeline to this shitty awful future timeline
I'd give a nod to Ronald Reagan's firing of striking air traffic control controllers as one such point, because in one move one of the wealthiest and most egalitarian nations set out to gut air travel (the future) and the middle class (the people).
posted by zippy at 10:11 AM on July 14, 2015 [26 favorites]
I'd give a nod to Ronald Reagan's firing of striking air traffic control controllers as one such point, because in one move one of the wealthiest and most egalitarian nations set out to gut air travel (the future) and the middle class (the people).
posted by zippy at 10:11 AM on July 14, 2015 [26 favorites]
Southwest definitely has (or at least had) the first row pointed backwards, and I got those seats whenever I could. Much more legroom.
posted by Navelgazer at 12:56 PM on July 14 [1 favorite −] Favorite added! [!]
I used to fly between Dallas and Houston/Austin a LOT. Like, 2-3 times a week. So did a lot of other people.
The rear-facing seats to the next row were just fine. It was generally a pretty gregarious bunch, and the happy-hour flights were often the best part of the day. (It takes TALENT to tie on a good buzz on a 40 minute flight.) I don't know anyone who didn't like those seats, but I guess there are some, huh?
This seating configuration looks fine to me.
posted by Thistledown at 10:15 AM on July 14, 2015
posted by Navelgazer at 12:56 PM on July 14 [1 favorite −] Favorite added! [!]
I used to fly between Dallas and Houston/Austin a LOT. Like, 2-3 times a week. So did a lot of other people.
The rear-facing seats to the next row were just fine. It was generally a pretty gregarious bunch, and the happy-hour flights were often the best part of the day. (It takes TALENT to tie on a good buzz on a 40 minute flight.) I don't know anyone who didn't like those seats, but I guess there are some, huh?
This seating configuration looks fine to me.
posted by Thistledown at 10:15 AM on July 14, 2015
I'm taking Lufthansa again next time
Herr Lufthansa charged me about $35 per person to reserve any seats at all for our family holiday this summer. If you don't pay you get seats assigned at the gate.
Fuck. That.
posted by GuyZero at 10:21 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
Herr Lufthansa charged me about $35 per person to reserve any seats at all for our family holiday this summer. If you don't pay you get seats assigned at the gate.
Fuck. That.
posted by GuyZero at 10:21 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
Mod note: One comment deleted. Let's skip the comparisons to slave ships or the Holocaust, please.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 10:22 AM on July 14, 2015 [13 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 10:22 AM on July 14, 2015 [13 favorites]
Mrs. Pterodactyl: I feel like I hear this kind of dismissive tone in a lot of conversations about airline flights, as if it's totally unreasonable for people with tight budgets to want to travel, and it really bothers me
I have no problem with options for making travel cheaper. What bothers me is *everyone* chooses the cheaper flight, whether or not that's all they can afford. The result is that any airline not offering 18" seat pitch, fees for checked bags, long check-in lines etc. quickly goes out of business, leaving no choice at all. Sadly, there don't seem to be enough customers like me willing to pay $20 more for a little less delay, and a little more comfort (where I travel anyway).
posted by Popular Ethics at 10:22 AM on July 14, 2015 [8 favorites]
I have no problem with options for making travel cheaper. What bothers me is *everyone* chooses the cheaper flight, whether or not that's all they can afford. The result is that any airline not offering 18" seat pitch, fees for checked bags, long check-in lines etc. quickly goes out of business, leaving no choice at all. Sadly, there don't seem to be enough customers like me willing to pay $20 more for a little less delay, and a little more comfort (where I travel anyway).
posted by Popular Ethics at 10:22 AM on July 14, 2015 [8 favorites]
This looks bad now, but I think they're betting you won't care once you're spending the whole flight jacked into the cyberverse through your headset. (in-flight VR uplink fee: $65)
posted by contraption at 10:23 AM on July 14, 2015
posted by contraption at 10:23 AM on July 14, 2015
You know what's even worse than increasing the chances of landing in a middle seat?
It's making passengers pay for the privilege of not traveling in a middle seat.
Many/most airlines are charging for better seats these days. I'm tall and claustrophobic, so I've resigned myself to paying extra for an aisle seat with extra legroom. On the other hand, I do prefer the certainty of knowing I can get that seat over the past systems, where it seemed like you needed some combination of luck or inside baseball knowledge to get the good seats. Or elite status on the airline, which I never have. I hate flying.
posted by Mavri at 10:27 AM on July 14, 2015
It's making passengers pay for the privilege of not traveling in a middle seat.
Many/most airlines are charging for better seats these days. I'm tall and claustrophobic, so I've resigned myself to paying extra for an aisle seat with extra legroom. On the other hand, I do prefer the certainty of knowing I can get that seat over the past systems, where it seemed like you needed some combination of luck or inside baseball knowledge to get the good seats. Or elite status on the airline, which I never have. I hate flying.
posted by Mavri at 10:27 AM on July 14, 2015
I'm generally pretty OK with sharing space with strangers, but face-to-face for hours? Oh hell no.
but that is how lots of trains work
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:32 AM on July 14, 2015 [14 favorites]
but that is how lots of trains work
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:32 AM on July 14, 2015 [14 favorites]
It's not an interesting configuration for commercial passengers, but soldiers are a different class of passenger and this looks like a clever way to squeeze a lot of them onto an aircraft.
posted by three blind mice at 10:33 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by three blind mice at 10:33 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
YOU CAN TOTALLY EVACUATE WITH THIS CONFIGURATION
All you need to do is have the seat cushions flip up like at a movie theatre. You do that, the rows will evacuate normally to the aisle.
posted by leotrotsky at 10:35 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
All you need to do is have the seat cushions flip up like at a movie theatre. You do that, the rows will evacuate normally to the aisle.
posted by leotrotsky at 10:35 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
oops
posted by kirkaracha at 10:36 AM on July 14, 2015
posted by kirkaracha at 10:36 AM on July 14, 2015
Has anyone patented the idea of stacking passengers into the fuselage like fire-wood yet?
I'm not sure if that was a reference, but they sure have.
posted by CaseyB at 10:36 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
I'm not sure if that was a reference, but they sure have.
posted by CaseyB at 10:36 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
Pay to get treated like cattle, get treated like cattle. I drive more now.
posted by fatbird at 10:36 AM on July 14, 2015
posted by fatbird at 10:36 AM on July 14, 2015
Since you can't have underseat storage with folding seats, where am I supposed to store my backpack now? Shove it up the designers ass? OK, if you insist.
posted by ckape at 10:37 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by ckape at 10:37 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
If this happens, I'm buying stock in Ostrich Pillows. They won't look so stupid then!
posted by orme at 10:37 AM on July 14, 2015 [4 favorites]
posted by orme at 10:37 AM on July 14, 2015 [4 favorites]
The British used to survive for railway journeys of several hours in compartments with two sets of four bench seats directly facing one another and without huge quantities of shared legroom. This could be fine or not depending on who else was in the compartment. But the English don’t traditionally do eye contact in public, so this seating arrangement didn’t really cause social difficulties.
posted by Quinbus Flestrin at 10:44 AM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by Quinbus Flestrin at 10:44 AM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
but that is how lots of trains work
Good point, though most of my train trips with that kind of seating have been either short (well under two hours) or allowed the seats to be flipped. Or both. Plus you can get up and move a lot more easily on most trains.
posted by asperity at 10:45 AM on July 14, 2015
Good point, though most of my train trips with that kind of seating have been either short (well under two hours) or allowed the seats to be flipped. Or both. Plus you can get up and move a lot more easily on most trains.
posted by asperity at 10:45 AM on July 14, 2015
If this happens, I'm buying stock in Ostrich Pillows. They won't look so stupid then!
Oh hey Zuckuss, didn't expect to see you on this red-eye to Cincinnati
posted by prize bull octorok at 10:45 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
Oh hey Zuckuss, didn't expect to see you on this red-eye to Cincinnati
posted by prize bull octorok at 10:45 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
@EmpressCallipygos: This seating configuration reminded you of dumb and annoying geographic restrictions on playing videos in other countries?
posted by HillbillyInBC at 10:47 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by HillbillyInBC at 10:47 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
obligatory Metafilter: Let's skip the comparisons to slave ships or the Holocaust, please.
posted by a halcyon day at 10:51 AM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by a halcyon day at 10:51 AM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
This seating configuration reminded you of dumb and annoying geographic restrictions on playing videos in other countries?
...Well, there is an equivalence in annoyance, I'm sure you'll agree.
The link is to a parody ad for something called the "love toilet"; I was able to find the set piece designer's web page, and it has a picture here.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:52 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
...Well, there is an equivalence in annoyance, I'm sure you'll agree.
The link is to a parody ad for something called the "love toilet"; I was able to find the set piece designer's web page, and it has a picture here.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:52 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
I'll repeat what I have said elsewhere: How do you get up to pee if you're not on an aisle?
Pfft. Easy. The seats are also toilets. Passengers board fully nude, are strapped into optimal safety position in their toilet-seats and fitted with Clockwork Orange style headgear to ensure they see any safety and marketing presentations, and flight attendants come through to rub styrofoam on their teeth at regular intervals. To prevent tooth decay or whatever.
posted by ernielundquist at 10:52 AM on July 14, 2015 [7 favorites]
Pfft. Easy. The seats are also toilets. Passengers board fully nude, are strapped into optimal safety position in their toilet-seats and fitted with Clockwork Orange style headgear to ensure they see any safety and marketing presentations, and flight attendants come through to rub styrofoam on their teeth at regular intervals. To prevent tooth decay or whatever.
posted by ernielundquist at 10:52 AM on July 14, 2015 [7 favorites]
asperity: I'm generally pretty OK with sharing space with strangers, but face-to-face for hours? Oh hell no.
feckless fecal fear mongering: but that is how lots of trains work
Anyone remember the SNL skit about an airline adopting the Big Apple subway experience? My google-fu is failing.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:53 AM on July 14, 2015
feckless fecal fear mongering: but that is how lots of trains work
Anyone remember the SNL skit about an airline adopting the Big Apple subway experience? My google-fu is failing.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:53 AM on July 14, 2015
The FAA rule -- everybody has to be able to get off in 90 seconds.
That's easily solvable by installing bomb-bay type doors in the floor. At the destination, the doors open, the seats switch to horizontal, and the passengers are deposited on the tarmac ($65.00 air mattress fee for those who want their fall cushioned). For emergencies, I figure we can have a system where explosive bolts blew out the side of the plane, allowing for quick departure
Granted, there will be the occasional manufacturer's defect that will cause the system to go off in flight, causing 20 or 30 passengers to get sucked screaming out into the void, but hey, CHEAP SEATS
posted by happyroach at 10:54 AM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
That's easily solvable by installing bomb-bay type doors in the floor. At the destination, the doors open, the seats switch to horizontal, and the passengers are deposited on the tarmac ($65.00 air mattress fee for those who want their fall cushioned). For emergencies, I figure we can have a system where explosive bolts blew out the side of the plane, allowing for quick departure
Granted, there will be the occasional manufacturer's defect that will cause the system to go off in flight, causing 20 or 30 passengers to get sucked screaming out into the void, but hey, CHEAP SEATS
posted by happyroach at 10:54 AM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
Ask yourself - why are the airlines floating this flagrant non-starter of an idea?
Seems obvious to me - they are intending to be cramming a few more seats into the regular configuration, and by putting this horror up, they hope to make you say, "These cramped seats are awful, but at least I won't have to stare someone in the eyes for 5 hours."
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 10:55 AM on July 14, 2015 [5 favorites]
Seems obvious to me - they are intending to be cramming a few more seats into the regular configuration, and by putting this horror up, they hope to make you say, "These cramped seats are awful, but at least I won't have to stare someone in the eyes for 5 hours."
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 10:55 AM on July 14, 2015 [5 favorites]
Ask yourself - why are the airlines floating this flagrant non-starter of an idea?
The airlines are not floating anything.
An airplane component manufacturer filed a patent and had it granted. A news outlet has a reporter who reviews patents for interesting news stories. They saw this and published it.
Literally no one is actually saying it will ever be implemented.
posted by GuyZero at 10:57 AM on July 14, 2015 [12 favorites]
The airlines are not floating anything.
An airplane component manufacturer filed a patent and had it granted. A news outlet has a reporter who reviews patents for interesting news stories. They saw this and published it.
Literally no one is actually saying it will ever be implemented.
posted by GuyZero at 10:57 AM on July 14, 2015 [12 favorites]
Has anyone patented the idea of stacking passengers into the fuselage like fire-wood yet?
This patent, linked from the Vox article, gets close...
posted by We had a deal, Kyle at 11:04 AM on July 14, 2015
This patent, linked from the Vox article, gets close...
posted by We had a deal, Kyle at 11:04 AM on July 14, 2015
Has anyone patented the idea of stacking passengers into the fuselage like fire-wood yet?
um, actually
posted by the phlegmatic king at 11:09 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
um, actually
posted by the phlegmatic king at 11:09 AM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
One of my worst flights was spent sitting in the emergency exit row. I thought I was doing great -- tons of leg room, no stranger sitting beside me... But there was a gentleman sitting in the row behind me. He was rather large. Considerably large. Large enough not to be able to fit in his seat.
As soon as we took off, the attendants took pity on him (or made it easier for themselves) by relocating the very big guy to their flip-down take-off seat, directly opposite me. As a big guy, very big guy, he had considerable manspreading going on, which he probably couldn't help. But as a result, I spent the six hour flight trying to avert my direct line of sight from the guy's crotch, as he bent up and down reaching for his food on the floor. Fighting eye contact with his crotch was a losing battle. It was right there. It was always right there.
So facing other passengers? If only that.
posted by Capt. Renault at 11:32 AM on July 14, 2015
As soon as we took off, the attendants took pity on him (or made it easier for themselves) by relocating the very big guy to their flip-down take-off seat, directly opposite me. As a big guy, very big guy, he had considerable manspreading going on, which he probably couldn't help. But as a result, I spent the six hour flight trying to avert my direct line of sight from the guy's crotch, as he bent up and down reaching for his food on the floor. Fighting eye contact with his crotch was a losing battle. It was right there. It was always right there.
So facing other passengers? If only that.
posted by Capt. Renault at 11:32 AM on July 14, 2015
Has anyone patented the idea of stacking passengers into the fuselage like fire-wood yet?
I don't particularly mind, but it's kind of bizarre for this question to be hanging over the whole thread yet not be allowed to provide the real and interesting historical affirmative answers. I doubt whether any readers would take such information to be belittling the history or overblowing this silly patent. And I do think it's genuinely relevant to why airlines don't actually attempt such things. Indirect evocations of past history in the minds of consumers genuinely affect modern business decisions, even when those decisions are about totally unrelated and trivial things.
posted by chortly at 11:49 AM on July 14, 2015
I don't particularly mind, but it's kind of bizarre for this question to be hanging over the whole thread yet not be allowed to provide the real and interesting historical affirmative answers. I doubt whether any readers would take such information to be belittling the history or overblowing this silly patent. And I do think it's genuinely relevant to why airlines don't actually attempt such things. Indirect evocations of past history in the minds of consumers genuinely affect modern business decisions, even when those decisions are about totally unrelated and trivial things.
posted by chortly at 11:49 AM on July 14, 2015
Just make the cabin a cocktail bar, with open bar, a dancefloor and few barstools. everybody wins.
posted by OHenryPacey at 12:10 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by OHenryPacey at 12:10 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
Literally no one is actually saying it will ever be implemented.
I dunno, military transport maybe?
posted by sexyrobot at 12:27 PM on July 14, 2015
I dunno, military transport maybe?
posted by sexyrobot at 12:27 PM on July 14, 2015
I don't think this provides more room for your shoulders, just less for your feet.
posted by Segundus at 12:29 PM on July 14, 2015
posted by Segundus at 12:29 PM on July 14, 2015
I dunno, military transport maybe?
From my limited experience seeing photos of military transport aircraft, packing people in denser is generally not their top problem. Generally military people travel with a lot of equipment and supplies. And per this article they are seated in ways that are already pretty personal-space free and that would not be approved for civilians for safety reasons. More photos of US military airplane packing. I honestly doubt that the hex packing is a lot more efficient than that.
posted by GuyZero at 12:34 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
From my limited experience seeing photos of military transport aircraft, packing people in denser is generally not their top problem. Generally military people travel with a lot of equipment and supplies. And per this article they are seated in ways that are already pretty personal-space free and that would not be approved for civilians for safety reasons. More photos of US military airplane packing. I honestly doubt that the hex packing is a lot more efficient than that.
posted by GuyZero at 12:34 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
You can squeeze me in as tight as I can fit if it means I am touching seats or walls and not other passengers. Last week I was at two baseball stadiums and the only issue with the tight seating in each was the stranger next to me elbowing me with every arm move. They weren't being rude, just trying to eat, drink and shift positions a few times. We both would have enjoyed a divider. I don't even need two armrests if one is turned into a seat divider instead.
posted by soelo at 12:45 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by soelo at 12:45 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
BUT ARMRESTS! I can face someone and not interact with them. I ride Muni. But I swear it takes all the self control I have not to swat at people whose elbows encroach. Really really, I will let you use the armrest but that's as far as I will allow. You don't get my seat space too.
posted by janey47 at 1:05 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by janey47 at 1:05 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
I think the problem isn't so much that people would prefer comfort over high prices, it's that this is what we're going to be forced to pay the same amount for in a few years. That said, I think this is a decidedly more fat-friendly seating arrangement and I don't give a shit if people can see my eyeballs on a plane because I wear one of these on flights anyway.
posted by SassHat at 1:11 PM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by SassHat at 1:11 PM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
i would rather burn up at 30,000 feet than be forced to watch my fellow passengers chew with their mouths open and pick their noses for 6h.
posted by poffin boffin at 1:26 PM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by poffin boffin at 1:26 PM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
no book can mask the slobbery slurp of open mouthed chewers
death is the only release
posted by poffin boffin at 1:26 PM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
death is the only release
posted by poffin boffin at 1:26 PM on July 14, 2015 [6 favorites]
My frustration is that I am generally willing to pay a bit more for more room, but it's not really an option. Those "premium" exit seats with more legroom? On the little planes I'd be taking, they're even narrower because the seat tray is in the armrest. Business class? No such thing anymore, apparently. First class? Three or four times the fare. At $500 instead of $400, I'd take the hit for a little more comfort. At $1300 instead of $400, not so much.
posted by Karmakaze at 1:26 PM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by Karmakaze at 1:26 PM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
More photos of US military airplane packing.
So, the military does it pretty much like any other passenger airline.
They need to avoid wasting valuable space and weight with excessive seating hardware. I'm sure with just a little creativity this can be done while allowing completely automated rapid evacuation of the aircraft by mechanical conveyance in case of emergency. Perhaps a more vertical arrangement.
posted by sfenders at 1:44 PM on July 14, 2015
So, the military does it pretty much like any other passenger airline.
They need to avoid wasting valuable space and weight with excessive seating hardware. I'm sure with just a little creativity this can be done while allowing completely automated rapid evacuation of the aircraft by mechanical conveyance in case of emergency. Perhaps a more vertical arrangement.
posted by sfenders at 1:44 PM on July 14, 2015
Some mid-level engineer just got his $500 patent bonus guys.
This is never getting built.
Seriously, patents mean nothing. Many years ago a patent of mine made it to Slashdot as "Look at this horrible thing $COMPANY is going to do!". But no, we were never really going to do that. I did get a nice check though. Companies like to have giant piles of patents, and many of them pay bonuses for filing. This is why you get tons of crazy sounding patents, because employees like money.
posted by thefoxgod at 1:51 PM on July 14, 2015 [5 favorites]
This is never getting built.
Seriously, patents mean nothing. Many years ago a patent of mine made it to Slashdot as "Look at this horrible thing $COMPANY is going to do!". But no, we were never really going to do that. I did get a nice check though. Companies like to have giant piles of patents, and many of them pay bonuses for filing. This is why you get tons of crazy sounding patents, because employees like money.
posted by thefoxgod at 1:51 PM on July 14, 2015 [5 favorites]
I wonder whether the Onion would have anything to say about this...
posted by Etrigan at 2:10 PM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 2:10 PM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
I've had a couple long-haul flights recently, and found the in-flight wifi worth paying for. I'm more worried that after in-flight wifi becomes the norm, that airlines will start ratcheting up the price.
The internet's come a long way in a very short amount of time, but reading so many complaints about having another human being's face pointed in their general direction makes me think we still have a ways to go before we are able to shake off the anti-social loner stereotype. Or maybe we've just embraced it. Trains and busses, hell even horse-drawn carriages, have had face-to-face seating configurations since time immemorial. Hopefully self-driving cars will lead to self-driving planes, so we can all have private jets (powered by a non-polluting and cheap energy source).
The linked pictures of military seating on planes actually looks pretty inefficient due to all that empty vertical space, but more to the point, the Pentagon's Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) program means commercial 747's will be used for troop transport when deemed necessary.
I'm more curious on how this patent was granted. As noted up-thread, United has had a less-cramped but similar configuration for business class for a while. Smushing it together a bit doesn't seem to make it patentable, but I'm not a patent lawyer, especially not an international one.
As far as in-light economy class liquor; the mini liquor 'nip' bottles are allowed by TSA guidelines. Buy em in 'bulk' online in order to save money.
posted by fragmede at 3:14 PM on July 14, 2015
The internet's come a long way in a very short amount of time, but reading so many complaints about having another human being's face pointed in their general direction makes me think we still have a ways to go before we are able to shake off the anti-social loner stereotype. Or maybe we've just embraced it. Trains and busses, hell even horse-drawn carriages, have had face-to-face seating configurations since time immemorial. Hopefully self-driving cars will lead to self-driving planes, so we can all have private jets (powered by a non-polluting and cheap energy source).
The linked pictures of military seating on planes actually looks pretty inefficient due to all that empty vertical space, but more to the point, the Pentagon's Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) program means commercial 747's will be used for troop transport when deemed necessary.
I'm more curious on how this patent was granted. As noted up-thread, United has had a less-cramped but similar configuration for business class for a while. Smushing it together a bit doesn't seem to make it patentable, but I'm not a patent lawyer, especially not an international one.
As far as in-light economy class liquor; the mini liquor 'nip' bottles are allowed by TSA guidelines. Buy em in 'bulk' online in order to save money.
posted by fragmede at 3:14 PM on July 14, 2015
This sadly reminds me of some of the first projects I did in maximizing space as an engineering student. One of the most egregious I recall was designing a parking lot to maximize the number of cars we could fit, wherein we left out the aisles for the cars to drive through the lot. Our goal was apparently not to design a useable lot, and I'd say this seating design follows along that line.
As for how it was able to receive a patent, I am not at all surprised. There are ridiculous patents granted all the time. Many patents are granted that infringe on other patents (solder alloy overlap is one clear area). It becomes a series of challenges as the original patent holders identify patents that infringe upon prior art. Keeps the lawyers busy I guess.
posted by blurker at 3:37 PM on July 14, 2015
As for how it was able to receive a patent, I am not at all surprised. There are ridiculous patents granted all the time. Many patents are granted that infringe on other patents (solder alloy overlap is one clear area). It becomes a series of challenges as the original patent holders identify patents that infringe upon prior art. Keeps the lawyers busy I guess.
posted by blurker at 3:37 PM on July 14, 2015
This design would be fine with me. Facing backwards is safer. There's more shoulder and leg room. I'm already an expert at avoiding eye contact.
But the best thing for me would be to offer the option to STAND UP FOR THE WHOLE FLIGHT. I am not joking. I have a horrible back/ass issue, that makes sitting in most chairs, benches, etc., very painful in very short order. I can stay on my feet just fine for 16 hours straight. I need 6'5" of headroom to do this. Otherwise, I need a recliner. Basically, my body goes vertical and horizontal pretty well, but the in-betweens really mess me up.
posted by yesster at 3:47 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
But the best thing for me would be to offer the option to STAND UP FOR THE WHOLE FLIGHT. I am not joking. I have a horrible back/ass issue, that makes sitting in most chairs, benches, etc., very painful in very short order. I can stay on my feet just fine for 16 hours straight. I need 6'5" of headroom to do this. Otherwise, I need a recliner. Basically, my body goes vertical and horizontal pretty well, but the in-betweens really mess me up.
posted by yesster at 3:47 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
I dont get it. We complain all the time that modern technology reduces people interaction. and now someone is trying to increase people interaction chances and everyone flips their shit.
So, you will have to acknowledge and, may be even (oh the horror) talk to the other person ... so what? Whats so scary about making eye contact?
posted by TheLittlePrince at 4:32 PM on July 14, 2015
So, you will have to acknowledge and, may be even (oh the horror) talk to the other person ... so what? Whats so scary about making eye contact?
posted by TheLittlePrince at 4:32 PM on July 14, 2015
well, if you're a woman who has had to spend a lot of her life avoiding jerkbags that take the slightest bit of notice to be an invitation to whatever-the-hell-they-want, then, yea, it's pretty fucking crappy.
posted by 5_13_23_42_69_666 at 4:43 PM on July 14, 2015 [9 favorites]
posted by 5_13_23_42_69_666 at 4:43 PM on July 14, 2015 [9 favorites]
I long for the days when closet person to a air marshal is Hercule Poirot.
posted by clavdivs at 4:46 PM on July 14, 2015
posted by clavdivs at 4:46 PM on July 14, 2015
So, you will have to acknowledge and, may be even (oh the horror) talk to the other person ... so what? Whats so scary about making eye contact?
I'm guessing you are a guy.
posted by poffin boffin at 5:21 PM on July 14, 2015 [8 favorites]
I'm guessing you are a guy.
posted by poffin boffin at 5:21 PM on July 14, 2015 [8 favorites]
Looks fine to me, but then again I ride the Metro-North Commuter Railroad often.
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 5:34 PM on July 14, 2015
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 5:34 PM on July 14, 2015
But the best thing for me would be to offer the option to STAND UP FOR THE WHOLE FLIGHT. I am not joking. I have a horrible back/ass issue, that makes sitting in most chairs, benches, etc., very painful in very short order. I can stay on my feet just fine for 16 hours straight. I need 6'5" of headroom to do this. Otherwise, I need a recliner. Basically, my body goes vertical and horizontal pretty well, but the in-betweens really mess me up.
I would pay extra money to be able to stand up the whole flight, or for an arrangement like a subway car with seats on the edge and standing room in the center. The current seating is sized for people about 1/3 of my height, so I am folded in like a pretzel with my knees jammed into the seat in front and my knees up too high.
Train seating tends to be fine because the facing seats are far enough apart that you don't bang knees together. The patented arrangement looks more sardine-like and well on the way to removing the tiny amount of dignity remaining.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:10 PM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
I would pay extra money to be able to stand up the whole flight, or for an arrangement like a subway car with seats on the edge and standing room in the center. The current seating is sized for people about 1/3 of my height, so I am folded in like a pretzel with my knees jammed into the seat in front and my knees up too high.
Train seating tends to be fine because the facing seats are far enough apart that you don't bang knees together. The patented arrangement looks more sardine-like and well on the way to removing the tiny amount of dignity remaining.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:10 PM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
poffin boffin: on a less screamy ragepanic level this doesn't seem like it would be compliant with ADA regs.
Which is why the handicapped will be checked in curbside with the luggage in this new arrangement.
posted by dr_dank at 6:59 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
Which is why the handicapped will be checked in curbside with the luggage in this new arrangement.
posted by dr_dank at 6:59 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
Are we all looking at the same diagrams? The seats are staggered. You're not looking into anyone's face or eyes unless you're, you know, actually looking into their eyes. Straight ahead of you is the back of a seat, not a forward-facing seatmate. This seems better for avoiding accidental interaction, since everyone will just put their noses down in their electronic devices or Skymall like they usually do, but now you don't have the awkward little dance around the armrests, or accidentally bumping into the person next to you. Gropers gonna grope whether they're beside you or not, and in this configuration at least they have to obviously reach to grab at anything, rather than just surreptitiously slide a hand under your ass and then act all innocent. I just don't get the hate-on for these seats, and I say this as someone who pretty much repudiates all human contact.
posted by Hal Mumkin at 7:14 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Hal Mumkin at 7:14 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
The company could easily afford to pay slightly more, but many will not. Not everyone actually has a choice.
And sometimes the 'company' is the taxpayers who would have a fucking fit if it cost more for me to be a little comfortable.
I think they could get even more in by turning the cabin into a bunkroom instead, like a japanese pod hotel. But isn't the plane already loaded to max with people weight plus luggage weight? More people = more people weight, so less luggage weight. But more people = more luggage, so more luggage weight.
Backwards-facing seats aren't bad at all. I rode in a Grumman C-2 during the Japan earthquake/tsunami crisis facing backward. It sure made the sudden stop by arresting gear nicer. Takeoff was fun, too. They told us to tighten our seatbelts (4-point like a racecar) very tightly. No, tighter. I still didn't get mine tight enough and felt like I was completely suspended by it on launch. I remember being in the middle of a sentence to my seatmate and only being able to get out "guhhhhhhh..." for the few seconds of acceleration. I'd totally be down for catapult-launched airliners.
posted by ctmf at 8:05 PM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
And sometimes the 'company' is the taxpayers who would have a fucking fit if it cost more for me to be a little comfortable.
I think they could get even more in by turning the cabin into a bunkroom instead, like a japanese pod hotel. But isn't the plane already loaded to max with people weight plus luggage weight? More people = more people weight, so less luggage weight. But more people = more luggage, so more luggage weight.
Backwards-facing seats aren't bad at all. I rode in a Grumman C-2 during the Japan earthquake/tsunami crisis facing backward. It sure made the sudden stop by arresting gear nicer. Takeoff was fun, too. They told us to tighten our seatbelts (4-point like a racecar) very tightly. No, tighter. I still didn't get mine tight enough and felt like I was completely suspended by it on launch. I remember being in the middle of a sentence to my seatmate and only being able to get out "guhhhhhhh..." for the few seconds of acceleration. I'd totally be down for catapult-launched airliners.
posted by ctmf at 8:05 PM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
everyone will just put their noses down in ... Skymall like they usually do
I'm so sorry to have to tell you this, but SkyMall is no longer with us. I know, it's hard to accept. The grieving process is probably going to take a while.
.
posted by asperity at 9:28 PM on July 14, 2015 [4 favorites]
I'm so sorry to have to tell you this, but SkyMall is no longer with us. I know, it's hard to accept. The grieving process is probably going to take a while.
.
posted by asperity at 9:28 PM on July 14, 2015 [4 favorites]
So my understanding is that the reason they always want your seat backs in the upright position for takeoff and landing is so that in the event of an emergency landing, they aren't inconveniently in the way on anyone's attempted egress. I seem to remember a video of some recent plane, and Airbus, or maybe a Boeing dreamliner in which all the passengers had to be able to exit in some small amount of time -- 90 seconds or something. here it is. You're not going to get a 90 second evacuation with that seat layout.
posted by smcameron at 10:04 PM on July 14, 2015
posted by smcameron at 10:04 PM on July 14, 2015
I wouldn't mind so much if all the new regulations made flights cheap, but it still costs me about $500 to get from Vancouver to Toronto, which, as I recall, was what it used to cost. Only, back then I could take 2xchecked bags and 2 carryons for free. Then it was 2 carryons and 1 checked bag, and $50 for an extra. Last I heard you are going to get 0 checked bags, and only 1 carryon, oh and they are going to be strict about enforcing carryon size (which my backpack doesn't always fit) since it was taking too long to load the plane, since everyone was carrying the stuff they'd need at the destination.
Can we say screw airlines and build a high speed rail network already? I recently went from Krakow to Prague on a train. Much roomier seat, no one beside me, no security, and they sold some crazily cheap food (AND you got a free apple juice and mini bottle of water.)
How about a maglev train? Just take that across the country.
posted by Canageek at 10:30 PM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
Can we say screw airlines and build a high speed rail network already? I recently went from Krakow to Prague on a train. Much roomier seat, no one beside me, no security, and they sold some crazily cheap food (AND you got a free apple juice and mini bottle of water.)
How about a maglev train? Just take that across the country.
posted by Canageek at 10:30 PM on July 14, 2015 [3 favorites]
Krakow to Prague is 537 km.
Toronto to Vancouver is 4,371 km plus a little mountain range towards the end.
I too like trains but unless you're Pierre Burton it's no way to cross the country.
posted by GuyZero at 10:36 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
Toronto to Vancouver is 4,371 km plus a little mountain range towards the end.
I too like trains but unless you're Pierre Burton it's no way to cross the country.
posted by GuyZero at 10:36 PM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
BTW on the issue of airlines hating you - they actually don't. The airline industry is the classic example for analysis using Porter's Five Forces Model. Basically running an airline is even worse than flying on one. They're basically always destined to run at low profits. They squeeze customers like hell because customers are really, really cheap and only chose base don price so squeezing is the only way to make any money.
The global average is a profit of $8 per passenger, per flight.
posted by GuyZero at 10:42 PM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
The global average is a profit of $8 per passenger, per flight.
posted by GuyZero at 10:42 PM on July 14, 2015 [2 favorites]
I'm getting the impression from both the schematics and the discussions that this design would work really, really well for people like me, (let's say 2% and be generous), and not terribly well for everyone else.
I would consider flying a lot more often on an aircraft with this design implemented; I imagine that's definitely a minority view.
posted by The Zeroth Law at 11:20 PM on July 14, 2015
I would consider flying a lot more often on an aircraft with this design implemented; I imagine that's definitely a minority view.
posted by The Zeroth Law at 11:20 PM on July 14, 2015
GuyZero: That is why I suggested high speed trains, not the rather slow one that I took, which went about the speed of a car on the highway. Sure, it goes more slowly, but it is already a full day trip to do Toronto-Vancouver:
Have to be at the airport 2-3 hours early, 4 hour flight, 7 hours total. Sure, you can't do a train that fast, but the fastest train in the world is 375 km/h, which would do Toronto-Vancouver in 12 hours. 7 vs 12 hours is basically the same thing, a full day, and a lot less of that would be spent waiting in line, going through security, etc. You walk on, sit down and can get your laptop out. Also you get cell signal the whole time. (Probably longer due to the rockies, to be honest, but still. say 14 hours of able to walk around, go to a dining car, use phone, etc. vs security, lines, I wonder if any nitrates are on my cloths from work, cramped seats, etc.)
Even if not doing Toronto-Vancouver, you could do Toronto-New York, Toronto-Montreal, etc. would be really nice to have.
posted by Canageek at 12:26 AM on July 15, 2015
Have to be at the airport 2-3 hours early, 4 hour flight, 7 hours total. Sure, you can't do a train that fast, but the fastest train in the world is 375 km/h, which would do Toronto-Vancouver in 12 hours. 7 vs 12 hours is basically the same thing, a full day, and a lot less of that would be spent waiting in line, going through security, etc. You walk on, sit down and can get your laptop out. Also you get cell signal the whole time. (Probably longer due to the rockies, to be honest, but still. say 14 hours of able to walk around, go to a dining car, use phone, etc. vs security, lines, I wonder if any nitrates are on my cloths from work, cramped seats, etc.)
Even if not doing Toronto-Vancouver, you could do Toronto-New York, Toronto-Montreal, etc. would be really nice to have.
posted by Canageek at 12:26 AM on July 15, 2015
I avoid BA business class because of their backward facing seats. They do have a "privacy" screen but it is a horrible frosted glass thing that clatters up and down whenever the stewardess needs to talk to you. Horrendous.
posted by Major Tom at 12:50 AM on July 15, 2015
posted by Major Tom at 12:50 AM on July 15, 2015
Regarding firewood-stacking loading of aeroplanes: this is called a couchette and can be found on European trains. I was in one just last night! It's both interesting and infuriating, but I would say that I don't think I'd mind laying out flat for some flights.
posted by bonje at 7:36 AM on July 15, 2015
posted by bonje at 7:36 AM on July 15, 2015
Skymall is BACK, bayyyyyyyyyyybeeeeeeee!
$500 bucks per patent acceptance? I need to look into this kinda thing! DIY bonus!
posted by tilde at 10:12 AM on July 15, 2015 [2 favorites]
$500 bucks per patent acceptance? I need to look into this kinda thing! DIY bonus!
posted by tilde at 10:12 AM on July 15, 2015 [2 favorites]
As with Mrs. Pterodactyl, rear facing seats do not work for me. Club seating is pretty common on corporate aircraft, and I have found myself quite miserable on many occasions when forced to sit in the half of the seats that face the wrong freaking way. Thankfully that has only escalated to misery for everyone else in the plane once.
I have only been sick on an airplane twice in my life when a rear facing seat wasn't involved, in somewhere around half a million miles. In a rear facing seat I almost always have at least mild nausea. Being at the bottom of the totem pole sucks, but complaining seems a bit gauche.
posted by wierdo at 11:53 AM on July 15, 2015
I have only been sick on an airplane twice in my life when a rear facing seat wasn't involved, in somewhere around half a million miles. In a rear facing seat I almost always have at least mild nausea. Being at the bottom of the totem pole sucks, but complaining seems a bit gauche.
posted by wierdo at 11:53 AM on July 15, 2015
« Older “don't leave me high, don't leave me dry” | “If something can’t be done with x-S, then it... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Though this is interesting as a sort of seating origami problem.
posted by asperity at 9:19 AM on July 14, 2015 [1 favorite]