New Aircraft Seats Will Make Flights Slightly More Bearable

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Flying is a terrible experience for many, and one of the biggest reasons is that there's not enough leg room. B/E Aerospace has patented a new type of adjustable aircraft seat that should improve the comfort of both taller and shorter passengers. Now someone just needs to fix the dry air, dry food, and dry entertainment.

The innovative system places seats on the same grooves as standard aircraft seat tracks, but standard seat fasteners are mounted on gears which would let airlines adjust the seats forward or back as needed. Other adjustable seating seat proposals exist, but all depend on the installation of special seat tracks which would complicate adoption, installation, and maintenance, and that's a factor working in favour of this a-bit-further-out concept.
 
Only practical if each row was only one seat wide... otherwise you have the two other seats closer to the window that have to squeeze in between the reduced space between the reclining guy and child in the drawing.
 
I think the worst part about planes is being stuck in a tiny metal tube with like 200 other people where like 50% of them are sick with something and touching every surface after sneezing on themselves.
 
Don't worry. The airlines will never let this happen.

Even if there were no cost to them, they would never do anything to make coach any more comfortable.

You see, they DEPEND on people in coach being miserable. If coach weren't miserable, no one would ever pay for business or first class.

It's a perverse situation where market forces have the opposite effect of what one would think, where customers vote with their wallets and the industry follows.
 
and this:
10524800773_4f16382de5_o.jpg

in a more compassionate world the seats would be getting wider. This is an obvious attempt to fat-shame people and squeeze even more money out of us all. cruel cruel airlines!!!!
 
Youn said:
and this:
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5512/10524800773_4f16382de5_o.jpg
in a more compassionate world the seats would be getting wider. This is an obvious attempt to fat-shame people and squeeze even more money out of us all. cruel cruel airlines!!!!
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with fat shaming, and everything to do with the almighty dollar.

- Drive as many people as you can up to Business or first class where they actually make some profit.
- Limit the losses in coach, by squeezing in as many people as possible and treating them like cattle.

Squeezing more people in the same space in coach is a win win. You get more money without providing anything additional, AND you make more people miserable to the point they feel they have no choice but to spend the thousands on Business Class.

IMHO, the airline industry needs some serious seat size regulations, because market forces simply are not doing their job here.
 
So does this mean the seats would automatically adjust for those of us who are 2m+ (6'7"+), or we still have to pray that the short individual in front doesn't want to have lots of space while reclining and causing me severe knee pain through the flight?
 
Ya I see this as more of a situation where taller people do not get any more leg room than they had before rather they just add 2 or 3 more rows and crunch in the shorter people. One of the few advantages smaller people had will evaporate.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
I think the worst part about planes is being stuck in a tiny metal tube with like 200 other people where like 50% of them are sick with something and touching every surface after sneezing on themselves.
Click to expand...

the new ones aren't metal tubes.
 
Megalith said:
Now someone just needs to fix the dry air, dry food, and dry entertainment.
Click to expand...

The air systems need a full overhaul.
They are not filtered, you can get anything from fuel and engine fumes to other peoples virii.
While they are at it, they could add a bit of moisture.
 
I am 6'3" and I hate taking the plane because of the waste of time at the airport, the annoying security, the seat torture and the bad food

I favor the train whenever possible.
 
I have no doubt that the airlines will jump on this with the fervor that they enacted baggage fees. The only problem for fliers is that it will cost, probably per inch of space above some minimum that would be appropriate for Tom Thumb.

As a frequent flier, I can tell you that I used to be able to get the exit row as a selection in seating. I still do, but now it is a $20 or so dollar "upgrade." Fortunately, nobody pays so I can always get the exit row at the airport on the little computer unless of course I can get a first class upgrade free. :D
 
RadXge said:
I am 6'3" and I hate taking the plane because of the waste of time at the airport, the annoying security, the seat torture and the bad food

I favor the train whenever possible.
Click to expand...

I'd favor anything over a plane when possible, and I'm only 6'

Problem with trains, especially on the west coast, is how slow they are.
A train from Los Angeles to Seattle takes 34 hours,
For about the same price I can fly there in about 2.5 hours.

I can even drive there in 18 hours. So I can drive 9 hours, eat and sleep for 10 hours, drive 9 more hours, and still be there 6 hours before the train!

Can't wait for real self driving cars, where I can lay back and sleep while the car drives all night.
 
Nenu said:
The air systems need a full overhaul.
They are not filtered, you can get anything from fuel and engine fumes to other peoples virii.
While they are at it, they could add a bit of moisture.
Click to expand...

787's air system fixes all of that and will be used in 747-8 and 737-8 and -9
 
RadXge said:
I am 6'3" and I hate taking the plane because of the waste of time at the airport, the annoying security, the seat torture and the bad food

I favor the train whenever possible.
Click to expand...

I'm 6'4" and I attempt to drive everywhere I can regardless of distance. It would be nice to actually have a flight were my knees weren't crushed. I really wish they'd stop putting those horrible reclining (knee-crusher) seats on planes. I'm not overweight and rarely have trouble with things like this but plane seats are terrible.

I'm going to fly for work on October, I dread that. I don't even own a large car, it's a Japanese compact, but it's massively more roomy than the seats they put on planes these days.
 
I have done well this year a Platinum status flyer with American Airlines since I can get the extended legroom, bulkhead seats, and exit rows for free ... I also have received a fair amount of first class upgrades this year ... however, if you are not a frequent flyer then flying has become much more difficult and expensive
 
Zarathustra[H];1041782987 said:
Nothing to do with fat shaming, and everything to do with the almighty dollar.

- Drive as many people as you can up to Business or first class where they actually make some profit.
- Limit the losses in coach, by squeezing in as many people as possible and treating them like cattle.

Squeezing more people in the same space in coach is a win win. You get more money without providing anything additional, AND you make more people miserable to the point they feel they have no choice but to spend the thousands on Business Class.

IMHO, the airline industry needs some serious seat size regulations, because market forces simply are not doing their job here.
Click to expand...
What market? Where I live 95% of flights of any consequence can be placed though one airline unless you want 3 or 4 connector flights. The FAA & FTC are not oblivious to this. They've allowed Hub formation that creates regional monopolies.
 
Zarathustra[H];1041782987 said:
Nothing to do with fat shaming, and everything to do with the almighty dollar.

- Drive as many people as you can up to Business or first class where they actually make some profit.
- Limit the losses in coach, by squeezing in as many people as possible and treating them like cattle.

Squeezing more people in the same space in coach is a win win. You get more money without providing anything additional, AND you make more people miserable to the point they feel they have no choice but to spend the thousands on Business Class.

IMHO, the airline industry needs some serious seat size regulations, because market forces simply are not doing their job here.
Click to expand...

I'm waiting for the first airline to go with bicycle-seat stand-up seating like you can see in some roller coasters.
 
jpm100 said:
What market? Where I live 95% of flights of any consequence can be placed though one airline unless you want 3 or 4 connector flights. The FAA & FTC are not oblivious to this. They've allowed Hub formation that creates regional monopolies.
Click to expand...

I am not sure how you could legally prevent hubs as they are truly a market force (it is much more economical to route your flights through a limited number of strategically located airports than scatter them across hundreds where flight volumes don't permit effective economies of scale) ... however, that said, the government should prevent gate squatting at hubs (if an airline doesn't maintain a minimum number of flights out of a gate then they should be forced to sell it ... you could have a sliding scale where a smaller airline is permitted a smaller number of minimum flights than a larger airline) ... other than that I am not sure what else you could do (other than override voter resolutions that have prevented the expansion of some of the largest USA hubs ... we could support more massive 24 hour airports in our largest cities that would facilitate international and domestic competition ... USA airports rarely make the top 10 internationally ... we need more Hong Kong, Singapore, Bangkok, Osaka, Inchon, Dubai style airports in the USA)
 
Kueller said:
I'm waiting for the first airline to go with bicycle-seat stand-up seating like you can see in some roller coasters.
Click to expand...

Except for short distance high volume commuter airlines or routes I would expect little interest from the airlines on that ... there are far less controversial ways they can cram in more passengers ... or more ways (like internet, food, etc) that they can monetize the flying experience ;)
 
kbrickley said:
Except for short distance high volume commuter airlines or routes I would expect little interest from the airlines on that ... there are far less controversial ways they can cram in more passengers ... or more ways (like internet, food, etc) that they can monetize the flying experience ;)
Click to expand...

Bike seats have other benefits, like they would weigh much less than traditional seats, which means big fuel ($$$) savings, particularly in the case of a partially filled flight that would normally be wasting fuel lifting heavy empty seats. With every seat providing room to maneuver around they would greatly speed boarding/disembarking.

The benefit of faster boarding/disembarking times would be allowing more flights to use a fixed number of gates at busy airports in a given time. Ultimately increasing the busiest airports' total capacity without costly infrastructure upgrades (and without forcing airlines to lease additional gate capacity).
 
Kueller said:
Bike seats have other benefits, like they would weigh much less than traditional seats, which means big fuel ($$$) savings, particularly in the case of a partially filled flight that would normally be wasting fuel lifting heavy empty seats. With every seat providing room to maneuver around they would greatly speed boarding/disembarking.

The benefit of faster boarding/disembarking times would be allowing more flights to use a fixed number of gates at busy airports in a given time. Ultimately increasing the busiest airports' total capacity without costly infrastructure upgrades (and without forcing airlines to lease additional gate capacity).
Click to expand...

Except the passengers would hate them ... it might work for flights under an hour (which we have plenty of) and for quick turn flights (commuters) as you mentioned but as long as the airlines make a profit they are happy ... people hate the regular seats and we already have enormous battles for overhead and underseat space ... also, the safety validation of bike seats could take years and I am not sure the airlines really want to go that route when they have other things they can try first ;)
 
This is all fine and dandy, but the moment self driving cars arrived the airlines are FUCKED. Everyone will get in the car at 9pm and arrive at 8am at their vacation.

And you know what, good. Overpriced, poor service, need to show up 2 hours early, nothing is free, RIDICULOUSLY uncomfortable for anyone tall/large/fat (I'm 6'2 and 270lb, big dude), and to top it off, if you book a flight and realize within 1 minute you picked the wrong date, to re-schedule to a different date is often literally the same as buying a second ticket.

Fuck these guys, I can't wait to see them become obsolete.
 
RyanLucier said:
This is all fine and dandy, but the moment self driving cars arrived the airlines are FUCKED. Everyone will get in the car at 9pm and arrive at 8am at their vacation.

And you know what, good. Overpriced, poor service, need to show up 2 hours early, nothing is free, RIDICULOUSLY uncomfortable for anyone tall/large/fat (I'm 6'2 and 270lb, big dude), and to top it off, if you book a flight and realize within 1 minute you picked the wrong date, to re-schedule to a different date is often literally the same as buying a second ticket.

Fuck these guys, I can't wait to see them become obsolete.
Click to expand...

Until they dig a tunnel between the USA and Hong Kong and build a superhighway between Hong Kong and Thailand there will be a market for me for some flights ... also, a lot of my trips are into Mexico and I don't think I would want to go on a self driving car excursion there ... my other trips are longer than an overnight drive as well (it's a long drive from El Paso to Minneapolis or El Paso to Greensboro) :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top