Is This the Future of Travel?
EmailABC's Vilma Anusaite reports: Flying economy might soon mean facing your fellow passengers and not eating much. This new aircraft seating design should make economy flying cheaper, accommodating more passengers per aircraft and allowing faster and safer boarding and exit but there is a catch, a major catch. Customers will be forced to sit on theatre-type folding chairs and to face their fellow passengers at rather close proximity, similar to the military way of transporting soldiers. The director of the British company Design Q that came up with the new aircraft seating says this type of plane is designed for short travel times (up to 90min) and should allow 15-20% passenger increase. “People will be able to drink and eat on the plane, just like people do in a bus… but limited”, said Howard Guy. The company came up with the idea working on a project with a primary school in Stoke on Trent. “We designed an interior for the aircraft that now resides at the school to facilitate learning.” Said Mr. Guy. “I realised that the proposal we built for them had as much application for a commercial aircraft as it did for school.” Design Q director told ABC News that this cabin seating design hasn’t been finalised and at the moment is being evaluated with different aircraft types. “It is new news! We put it out to gauge reaction from people and operators”, he said.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Very interesting; however, what about acceleration changes shift people’s upper bodies? Won’t there be a risk of folks smacking heads during take-off roll or landing? And what would the injury rate be for a minor emergency, like a collapsed nose-gear?
Posted by: Bill | September 22, 2009, 10:57 am 10:57 am
Woohoo. You want to fly for nothing, you get this. Next will be a long lanyard and harness. They will just hook up up and zing you to your seat. I wish to heck someone would have the #### to bering back regulation to the airline industry…please.
Posted by: wired-up | September 22, 2009, 11:28 am 11:28 am
Looks like there is no room to get through the aisles, when everyone is seated.
Kinda problematic, for food service, and escape in an emergency, not to mention awkward for watching a movie.
Posted by: Rick McDaniel | September 22, 2009, 11:36 am 11:36 am
Looks like seatbelts and head supports are a thing of the past too.
Posted by: Post | September 22, 2009, 11:49 am 11:49 am
I have a better idea that can double that. Remove the seats and put pews instead. Thanks everyone, i will be going to the patent office now.
Posted by: Doug | September 22, 2009, 11:55 am 11:55 am
Yuck. I guess it is only for really slim people. Overweight people will have to drive I guess.
Posted by: Sue | September 22, 2009, 12:32 pm 12:32 pm
To Rick McDaniel: On a 90 min flight or less, there are not food carts and no movies. And if they’re that cheap to set the seats like that, you can bet there won’t be any peanuts or beverage.
Posted by: Martin Frégeau | September 22, 2009, 12:37 pm 12:37 pm
I think there’s real value to this new airplane seating concept. It will jumpstart high-speed rail service.
Posted by: Jack | September 22, 2009, 12:38 pm 12:38 pm
It kinda looks like the paratroopers plane or WWII, only more modern. Do they supply the parachutes for landing or do we have to bring our own.
The economy is bringing us in the dumps.
Posted by: Martin Frégeau | September 22, 2009, 12:39 pm 12:39 pm
I think this photo is just an idea. They are working out the seatbelt, foodcart, etc details. If it does fly (pun intended), I will switch to rail or drive! I would rather NOT sit any closer to some of the types of people I see on airplanes than I have to, and definately don’t want to FACE them! ugh!
CB
Posted by: Caroline | September 22, 2009, 1:08 pm 1:08 pm
And the bags go where? All over the aisles, likely.
Posted by: Virginian | September 22, 2009, 2:13 pm 2:13 pm
dear gods in heaven! clearly none of these school children have flown. what an insane group to consult with.
what a ghastly nightmare. 90 minutes like this???!?!?! are you out of your minds? no one can stretch out, get a cat nap which is vital to weary travelers. i would not fly for 5 minutes in an abomination like this. and i have flown everything from puddle jumpers to concorde.
Posted by: JeanneBCat | September 22, 2009, 2:24 pm 2:24 pm
Further to my previous comment…no back support, no neck support, what about severe turbulence, a plane load of broken backs on landing, snapped at the waist, presumably where the seat belt would be?
Just insane. who was on drugs the day this ridiculous design took place? i am still shaking my head, i cannot believe something like this would actually go from a drawing board to made reality.
Posted by: JeanneBCat | September 22, 2009, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
One big advantage: The selfish little 5-footer in the seat in front of you won’t be able to ram her seat back into your knees without warning.
That alone makes this new design worthwhile. Or… maybe… on short flights at least, the airline could disable the seat-back recline on current aircraft?
Posted by: editorsteve | September 22, 2009, 2:51 pm 2:51 pm
How uncomfortable! They show that it’s suited for people the size of children and the adult size people have to kneel on the floor. Where are the safety restraints?
Posted by: TX_MBell | September 22, 2009, 2:53 pm 2:53 pm
I don’t see that it maximizes seating. Where there are 8 rows of 4 seats here, the similar width 737′s I’ve been on have a 3-2 arrangement which would provide 40 seats instead of the 32 pictured. This arrangement would result in more expensive seats – I don’t see things moving that way.
Posted by: The_Mick | September 22, 2009, 3:03 pm 3:03 pm
This is a cool idea. I doubt it’ll make it past regulators. To all you that are complaining about it, grow up. Thousands of soldiers have flown like this, just before getting out and fighting for their lives, just so you can whine and cry about this. Millions of people worldwide travel in less comfort than you would if you traveled like this, yet you’re crying about this. Realise what you have and appreciate it, instead of whinning and crying about how you’ll be a little uncomfortable for an hour and a half. Bunch of babies.
Posted by: Lawrence | September 22, 2009, 3:11 pm 3:11 pm
For a 90 min or less flight? You’re better off driving as just trying to get through the airport will take longer than your car trip. Taking the rails is a much better idea!
Posted by: raggmopp | September 22, 2009, 4:15 pm 4:15 pm
carry-on bags? purses? do the airlines really want us to check ALL our bags? and at take-off and landing I guess we’re to hold on to some part of the seat to keep from falling over?
hmmm, would like to see form follow function. maybe the designers haven’t been on a plane lately.
Posted by: zerlinarosa | September 22, 2009, 4:35 pm 4:35 pm
Don’t worry, this travel may be fine for the military but for the elderly and the frail among us would have to take the train. I think this type of travel for the normal American isn’t safe, what if you had a really hard landing? No head restraints and nothing to hold on to. I’m noticing none of the children in the photo had on seat belts either. On a Military transport they are buckled very well, also have parachutes and helmets just in case. Is this how we are all going to fly? Too ridiculous. Yes the bullet train is the only way to go. Then the airlines won’t need to worry about changing the seat configuration. They’ll be out of business!
Posted by: Sharon | September 22, 2009, 4:50 pm 4:50 pm
Bad Bad idea and very unsafe. Nobody would travel this way for vacation or business, forget it. The only plus is if you have to use the restroom alot, you aren’t bothering the person next to you. Which brings up the point, is there a restroom on this thing?
Posted by: Donna B | September 22, 2009, 5:15 pm 5:15 pm
Obviously a viral campaign from by AMTRAK.
Posted by: patrick | September 22, 2009, 5:22 pm 5:22 pm
This seating arrangement would not do well in a crash or even for something normal like takeoff or climb. In this configuration, front to back g-forces on the plane are felt by the passengers as lateral g-forces, which is very uncomfortable for takeoff, climbs, and descents and dangerous or fatal for crashes.
Posted by: Jason | September 23, 2009, 12:03 am 12:03 am
What happens when the plane hits air pockets and turbulent weather? Does every body hit their heads on the ceiling and get head injuries?
Posted by: Patricia | September 23, 2009, 1:46 am 1:46 am
This is absolutely ridiculous. I think this will kill a lot of business in the flying industry. I have to deal with this kind of uncomfortable seating as it is already being in the military. I dont not want to have to travel this way on my leisure travels.
Posted by: Neek | September 23, 2009, 2:05 am 2:05 am
It will either make the children lazy or make them think faster because the real spiritual school is far up in the meditative skies. However, the design is between the laws of balance and variety. I see no back-rest sighs here; nevertheless, it is ingenious and space generous.
Posted by: SANKEY EMANUWA | September 23, 2009, 5:33 am 5:33 am
A 90-minute flight can easily turn into 5 hours sitting on the runway. You’ve Got to be kidding.
Posted by: travelnut | September 24, 2009, 1:13 pm 1:13 pm