PDA

View Full Version : Airline passengers or cattle?



whiskeylover
September 14th, 2010, 09:00 PM
See this (http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/09/14/skyrider.compact.seats/index.html?hpt=C2).


Jami Counter, a senior director at airline seat mapping site SeatGuru.com, believes regulatory barriers are just one reason this type of seating is unlikely to be adopted by American air carriers. Passenger comfort is the other major hurdle.

So now our comfort seems like a hurdle to these clowns.

KiwiNZ
September 14th, 2010, 09:04 PM
I refuse to fly cattle class period.

fatality_uk
September 14th, 2010, 09:04 PM
The CAA, FAA and virtually ANY other authority responsible for air safety is likely to fail this on so many grounds it will never get off the ground if you excuse the pun.

JBAlaska
September 14th, 2010, 09:05 PM
"For flights anywhere from one to possibly even up to three hours ... this would be comfortable seating," Dominique Menoud, Aviointeriors director general, told USAToday. "The seat ... is like a saddle. Cowboys ride eight hours on their horses during the day and still feel comfortable in the saddle."


Well if Cowboys can do it...:p

snowpine
September 14th, 2010, 09:08 PM
LOL, the model in the photograph is trying her hardest not to crack up laughing! :)

kaldor
September 14th, 2010, 09:13 PM
Dear lord. I'd never be able to sit on a plane in seats like that.

Mr. Picklesworth
September 14th, 2010, 10:06 PM
Okay, so they have more passengers. Now they need more food, more flight attendants, better traffic management, something to deal with that claustrophobic guy, more luggage space and more rescue equipment. Another washroom would be a good idea, too.

In other words: fat chance.

Trains are great. Support trains :)

Bachstelze
September 14th, 2010, 10:12 PM
See this (http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/09/14/skyrider.compact.seats/index.html?hpt=C2).



So now our comfort seems like a hurdle to these clowns.

So the reason airlines aren't likely to adopt an uncomfortable seat is because they treat passengers as cattle. Makes perfect sense.

@KiwiNZ: Not everyone is rich. A "cattle class" seat for a long flight costs more than the monthly income of a lot of people.

LowSky
September 14th, 2010, 10:16 PM
let me paint a picture... the price will be the same, more people on a plane, and no overhead luggage because of the now required headroom, which means checking the bag, which will then cost more... I can really see this happening. But one question how do you wear a seat belt in a saddle?

snowpine
September 14th, 2010, 10:16 PM
It is only a matter of time before they sedate us and pack us into small capsules.

KiwiNZ
September 14th, 2010, 10:54 PM
So the reason airlines aren't likely to adopt an uncomfortable seat is because they treat passengers as cattle. Makes perfect sense.

@KiwiNZ: Not everyone is rich. A "cattle class" seat for a long flight costs more than the monthly income of a lot of people.

Heard of Deep Vein Thrombosis? Fly Cattle class and you are at real risk of this .

Also the Flight time from New Zealand to London is 21.5 hours , and to Paris is 28 hours their is no way I m sitting squashed into cattle class for that length of time ever.

cammin
September 14th, 2010, 10:54 PM
It is only a matter of time before they sedate us and pack us into small capsules.

A few years after they start packing people into capsules without sedation.

kamaboko
September 14th, 2010, 10:56 PM
Quote from the manufacturer: "The seat ... is like a saddle. Cowboys ride eight hours on their horses during the day and still feel comfortable in the saddle."

So Mr. Manufacturer, is this what you're using at your office desk? Moreover, I can't recall any conversations I've had with passengers whereby they had a burning desire to feel like they've been ridding a horse after a flight. Seriously, these people are idiots and prospects for Darwin Awards. Maybe the seat will kill 'em. lol.

KiwiNZ
September 14th, 2010, 10:59 PM
Attention male members , consider those seats for a minute, now think of the worse flight you have been on for turbulence, I think you get the picture. ;)

earthpigg
September 14th, 2010, 11:03 PM
um,

since when was the FAA involved in the safety of seats?

if safety was a concern, at all, wouldn't seats face backwards at the very least?

Frogs Hair
September 14th, 2010, 11:30 PM
They look like seats for a free fall amusement park ride.

Old Marcus
September 14th, 2010, 11:37 PM
That looks horrible. Of course, being the cheaper seats will mean that they cost the same as a standard seat does now, and the current seats will be charged at first class rates.

Mind you, here in the UK I noticed a pleasant occurance from one train company, CrossCountry. They took over a good chunk of the trains that Virgin used to run, and recently reintroduced the InterCity 125s and refurbished them much like First Great Western did with theirs. Part of the refurbishments from both companies included the increasing of legroom in non-table seats, meaning you don't have to sit at an awkward angle any more. CrossCountry also did this on the Voyager trains, mainly by removing luggage racks from the middle of the carriages, which makes travelling in a Voyager a bit more tolerable now.

Sorry for the tl;dr, just wanted to share that with everyone. :P

Sef
September 14th, 2010, 11:38 PM
if safety was a concern, at all, wouldn't seats face backwards at the very least?

Many people do not like riding backwards that is the main reason that airlines seats face forward.

Dustin2128
September 14th, 2010, 11:42 PM
A few years after they start packing people into capsules without sedation.
:lolflag:

Brunellus
September 15th, 2010, 12:06 AM
I wonder how this type of ultra-high-density "seating" would work in an emergency evacuation context. I also wonder about how long it would take a small regional jet packed with people like this to be loaded and unloaded.

treesurf
September 15th, 2010, 12:11 AM
It'll never fly.

amitabhishek
September 15th, 2010, 07:12 AM
Can't recollect the name but one nutjob airline says a co-pilot is not needed on their aircrafts. Dare fly in that airline!!

toupeiro
September 15th, 2010, 07:37 AM
On the other hand.

In the US, this is EXCELLENT fodder for a continental high-speed rail system. Americans will not tolerate this. I generally have to fly back and forth between California and Texas on business usually a few times a year, I can't imagine attempting that flight (~ 3 hours in the air for nonstop) with seating like this..

tadcan
September 15th, 2010, 08:28 AM
Can't recollect the name but one nutjob airline says a co-pilot is not needed on their aircrafts. Dare fly in that airline!!

that would be the head of ryanair (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39082695/ns/travel-travel_tips/)

TNT1
September 15th, 2010, 08:34 AM
Trains are great. Support trains :)

Bugger that! If I can't get there on the motorbike, I wont go. Problem is, there's almost nowhere the 990 Adv can't go;)

TNT1
September 15th, 2010, 08:39 AM
Can't recollect the name but one nutjob airline says a co-pilot is not needed on their aircrafts. Dare fly in that airline!!

Yeah, but it's been proven that airliners can take off and land completely under the control of the auto pilot, so why not reduce staff? I mean pilots and cr@p are expensive, imagine the saving to your opex if you can halve the number of expensive salaries you have to pay...

bouncingwilf
September 15th, 2010, 08:42 AM
Within the airline industry ( certainly in the UK) passengers are known as self loading freight!

bouncingwilf

amitabhishek
September 15th, 2010, 09:11 AM
Yeah, but it's been proven that airliners can take off and land completely under the control of the auto pilot, so why not reduce staff? I mean pilots and cr@p are expensive, imagine the saving to your opex if you can halve the number of expensive salaries you have to pay...

Yeah but you need a pilot to engage an auto pilot and what if that pilot dies of heart attack or food poisoning midair. I don't think cabin crew is trained enough to fly a commercial airliner. Heck they can't even do their job without a nasty frown.

Khakilang
September 15th, 2010, 10:20 AM
A few years after they start packing people into capsules without sedation.

And they hang you up on a hanger. That save a lot of space and when disembarking they just slide you down the exit.
):P

TNT1
September 15th, 2010, 11:18 AM
Yeah but you need a pilot to engage an auto pilot and what if that pilot dies of heart attack or food poisoning midair. I don't think cabin crew is trained enough to fly a commercial airliner. Heck they can't even do their job without a nasty frown.


Surely if they can put a man on the moon, they can enable an auto pilot by remote control?

Old Marcus
September 15th, 2010, 12:08 PM
Surely if they can put a man on the moon, they can enable an auto pilot by remote control?

Ironically, the systems for enabling autopilot are probably a lot more complicated than the entire systems used to put men on the moon.

roddie
September 15th, 2010, 12:19 PM
Don't think I've ever flown a flight longer than 2 hours and I find the current seats uncomfortable enough as they are, even for that duration! These seats look like some sort of torture appartus...

amitabhishek
September 15th, 2010, 12:43 PM
Surely if they can put a man on the moon, they can enable an auto pilot by remote control?

Call me old fashioned but I would like give a pass to such an airline.:)

TNT1
September 15th, 2010, 12:50 PM
Call me old fashioned but I would like give a pass to such an airline.:)
Hey, I hope someone does achieve it... I'd like to watch from a suitably safe distance...

john.hernandez
September 15th, 2010, 01:59 PM
I am going to look for alternative means of travel definitely ;-) ... this bring to mind that star treck line - TO BOLDLY GO WHERE NO MAN HAS GONE BEFORE... apparently they intend to change this to TO BOLDLY GO HOW NO MAN HAS GONE BEFORE.

whiskeylover
September 15th, 2010, 02:53 PM
Whats next? Rectal probes in the middle of the seats so passengers don't shift around during flight?

koleoptero
September 15th, 2010, 03:21 PM
Yeah, but it's been proven that airliners can take off and land completely under the control of the auto pilot, so why not reduce staff? I mean pilots and cr@p are expensive, imagine the saving to your opex if you can halve the number of expensive salaries you have to pay...


Surely if they can put a man on the moon, they can enable an auto pilot by remote control?

Hardware or software failure anyone?


It is only a matter of time before they sedate us and pack us into small capsules.

Capsules will be first-class. The rest will be just packed one on top of the other.

Swagman
September 15th, 2010, 03:47 PM
Big Badda Boom Multi-Pass ?

Tristam Green
September 15th, 2010, 03:48 PM
Whats next? Rectal probes in the middle of the seats so passengers don't shift around during flight?

IT, a la South Park, comes directly to mind.

TNT1
September 15th, 2010, 06:42 PM
Hardware or software failure anyone?




Good heavens no! You don't think they'd try this running that "other" OS, do you?

treesurf
September 15th, 2010, 06:57 PM
I can't imagine sitting on one of those for one of my 15 hour non stop flights to Hong Kong. I'd definitely be scraping up the money for an upgrade...

KegHead
September 15th, 2010, 07:27 PM
Hi!

I fly SW on short flights and AA on long hauls (1St Class).

KegHead

3+ hours = long haul