This appears to be a concept design by an industrial designer. It's a pitch to airliners.
https://vimeo.com/394558118 shows (from 00:33) how it works in more detail. Ladder pulls out from between the seats (although see http://www.zephyrseat.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Zephyr-... for newer built-in ladder design), and arm rest holds upper chair passengers in place. The cushion that completes the bed appears to fold out from just below tray table.
Luggage goes to upper right of seat, so is securely stored and accessible during flight, a win versus traditional overhead lockers. Seat appears to be a little lower than normal. It looks like there is some additional storage space to the right of the footwell.
Main issues I see are slightly awkward banana shaped sleeping position, and the safety issue for evacuating top deck. The updated built-in ladder design might be sufficient for able-bodied passengers to evacuate quickly enough.
This would be much more attractive than existing premium economy to me and would compete well with business. The main differentiator of business that interests me is the lie-flat bed; the enhanced service and food / beverages, lounge access, and priority boarding and luggage delivery is less important.
Just evacuating the top deck? Because the moment a single ladder is in the aisle, no one can move anymore, so it's really a matter of "even having a single one is going to fail FAA regulation".
The headline here is quite misleading. This seat is intended to compete with premium economy seats, not with economy.
These seats produce the same cabin density at today's premium economy, while trying to offer a business-class-lite experience.
Airlines might buy these, because if they can differentiate premium economy a bit more from regular economy, they might be able to sell more of it.
Most airlines are installing only 25-30 seats in their premium economy classes, even on big birds like 777-300. If this makes the class more appealing, they may be able to install 40 seats or more instead.
The fact that they are stacked, and that they don't lie flat, will keep them sufficiently distinct from true business class not to cannibalize business class sales.
But, these seats won't leave room for overhead lockers. The seats have an amount of small-item storage that will feel extremely generous in Premium Economy, but without the lockers, there's no storage for bigger bags.
This is also not an unsolvable problem, but airlines are exceptionally risk-averse and change-averse, so it'll take some real convincing.
And then there's the accessibility and safety issues with the ladders to resolve and the question of how people will feel about the low ceiling clearance (will it feel premium? especially to people who aren't regular travelers)
I do hope some airline tries it. There is a ton of room to make air travel different, but airlines are all very fearful, staid entities. For the most part, airlines consider themselves bold if they buy the same Recaro seat as every other airline, but in unique color or fabric combination.
The issue is that airlines would simply modify this design to increase passenger density instead of offering the same density but with more space. The solution to ever-shrinking space in the airplane, however, is economic, not technical. Imagine if you could select a 1X-3X room in increments of 0.5X with proportional pricing when you buy a ticket. Airline does not lose money and customers get what they can afford. Right now we only have 1X, 1.15X and 3X options which unfortunately neither sufficient to fit the curve or even have same distribution or pricing.
This is for a premium economy class. The existence of premium economy is already us reaching the point where people are prepared to pay more for more.
Airlines believe that they can make more money selling fewer seats at higher prices -- at a price point typically 50-100% above economy, for about 50-70% more space.
The thing is, most flights only have 3 rows of premium economy (except some ultra-long-haul Singapore Air flights) -- right now, most people still want to buy whatever is cheapest -- partially because international travel is actually out of their budget, and so taking that basic-economy cheap fare is part of finding a way to go at all, and partially for a reason that I don't think airlines appreciate (they've made people expect service and comfort to be absolutely horrid, and so many customers wouldn't pay more for better because they don't trust the airline to be capable of providing better, and assume the higher prices are just a rip-off and not actually a better product.)
Well, and it's basically impossible to comparison shop flights with seat space or comfort as a filtering element. Right now the only really usable criteria are price and number of free bags.
Google Flights gives indications on each leg whether it is roomy, average, or tight. For premium classes, it reports recliner, angle-flat, or lie-flat.
You still can't search by it, though.
This isn't much, but it is integrated into a flight search engine.
Of course, if you really want to know, there are sites like seatguru with all the details (but average travelers are never going to look for that)
Regarding overhead bin space, I think carriers and their onboard staff can adapt by using some of the overhead space in the front rows of economy class as needed, by handling PE passengers’ luggage for them, if this means added margins. The staff already partakes in similar activities when overhead space is limited and/or the passenger needs physical assistance.
Given trends in economy class and how carry-on suitcase traffic jams are at times causing flight delays, I can see a future where carryon suitcases are no longer permitted for economy class passengers. We’re already on this slippery slope.
Yes, that is one possible solution. One of the overhead lockers makers is already demoing a locker with weight sensors and colored lights intended to be part of a reservation system, where premium passengers or those paying a fee would get reserved space in specific locker locations.
Of course, enforcement is hard. Airlines moving toward "basic economy" without access to lockers is becoming a thing -- and this can be enforced by making them board last and in a separate group, so the agents can check for big/multiple bags, and if a "basic" passenger does manage to cheat and find space, since they're last, they're not taking the space from a "paying customer"
Airlines are moving toward an increasingly price-continuity model, where you can buy a ticket at whatever price feels acceptable to you, and there will always be another enhancement of upgrade available at a modest cost, pushing you to spend more to feel less discomfort.
One thing they will have to consider for turnaround times is how much slower is cleaning with this design? Maybe it ends up more ergonomic to reach some of the trash on the ground up there, but I would think something like vacuuming would be slower.
Business and First classes already have this problem in spades, of course -- but they're expensive services and lower person density (leading to less average uncleanliness).
Maybe forego carpets and build in an automated hose-down system? (probably not)
A 777 has a lot of space up top that isn’t being used for anything beyond crew breaks; overhead is also rarely a problem on long long hauls (the planes are bigger, have plenty of overhead space per seating, and people don’t carry as much on when they have to go through immigration and customs anyways). I don’t think space is really as much as a problem as weight, which shouldn’t be an issue here.
I don't think weight will be a major problem here, given the stated focus on it.
I couldn't find weight specs for units of Zodiac Z535s or Recaro PL3530 seats, which are two of the major competitors in the premium economy market to compare with the "under 50kg per unit" claim on the Zephyrs. If you have the numbers, I'd be interested
I wonder how you get drinks and food to the top row, too. Doable, but not easy, and if you hit a turbulence at right moment you could have Bloody Bloody Mary all over the attendant and someone sitting on the lower row...
> Airlines might buy these, because if they can differentiate premium economy a bit more from regular economy, they might be able to sell more of it.
I’m not sure the economics are that simple. I won’t fly economy long haul, and generally fly business. When I’m feeling broke or when I think it won’t be thaaat bad I’ll go for Premium Economy. This seat would allow me to fly PE more, and cost the airline a Business seat.
> These seats produce the same cabin density at today's premium economy, while trying to offer a business-class-lite experience.
This would be vastly superior to business class and even to most airlines' versions of first class. Not sitting next to someone (and barely even having to see them) is worth a fortune to me.
Modern business class gives you that, plus true lie-flat seating without anybody over your head. Most airlines are installing either reverse herringbone seats or suite-style lie-flats -- but either way, increasingly with aisle access for all passengers.
Some airlines are still doing 2-2-2 layouts, but that is rapidly disappearing on long-haul service.
The lack of airlines' willingness to experiment is bizarre to me, considering they have large fleets of planes and could easily A/B test new technologies with minimal investment and disruption of their regular business.
It's not particularly tempting to A/B test seats which will cost you $500k per aircraft to install. Plus you can't conduct real world tests on equipment which doesn't have the relevant certifications.
People also don't like to be surprised by their brand, at least in non-trivial ways. I'd predict constant A/B testing of disruptive ideas (such as new seating arrangements or radically boarding schemes) would end up damaging the brand and customer retention.
They could do focus groups though. Build a few different seating arrangements, pay people to sit in them for a couple hours, and collect their thoughts afterwards.
They used to spend more than that on cherry tomatoes every year. I think a few hundred thousand for trying out different seats would be a drop in the bucket.
I can’t imagine that with stacked seating and ladders that come out and block the aisle that you could evacuate a plane in 90 seconds or less. That’s the standard for the FAA:
If you look at a modern long haul cabin like a BA 777 [1] or the new SAS A350 [2], you'll se that the number of "economy plus" seats is quite small. It's 3 rows (18 seats) on the BA plane, and 4 rows (24 seats) on the SAS plane. It's well under 10% so even the evacuation time for the whole plane isn't going to be severely affected by the seat change in maybe 10% or 20% of the seats. There would be no emergency exit windows in this section, for example. It would be say 30 people of which half(?) would be on the upper level. So say 15 people out of 280 on a full A350. It's not nothing, but the speed of disembark in reality will be more dependent on the age of the people in economy than on whether 15 people will need to climb down from the top shelf.
Obviously the idea behind making economy plus more attractive like this is to be able to sell more of it and charge more for it, so it may be that airlines want to install this on maybe 25% of a cabin, at which point it might start affecting evacuation etc. But if it's a simple swap in current economy-plus sections it wouldn't be a big issue because of how few seats that is.
Another safety issue seems to be that people would always have to wear a seatbelt in the upper row, otherwise unexpected turbulence could lead to falls and bad injuries.
Turbulence that bad would be the kind that causes injuries in normal seats too (by banging heads in the celing for example). Its more common and dangerous than people think and that's why we are instructed to always wear the seatbelt when seated. Cabin staff couldn't really give more than that advice to people in top seats, but perhaps people would believe that warning in this case because they can see the danger.
The article is so annoying, I searched for the word "security" and this word came up zero times. I wonder if the fancy San Francisco "industrial designer" even considered that?
>Mr. O’Neill says that because the seats are stacked, airlines will not forfeit capacity. The same number of seats in today’s wide-body cabins can be accommodated using Zephyr, so it should not impact an airline’s bottom line. Mr. O’Neill explained, “The best part of this seat: it has NO heavy mechanical/electronic components. The entire seat has only 2 moving pieces inside, so the weight and direct maintenance costs for the airline are significantly reduced! Using advanced composite materials, we can build this seat at less than 50kg per unit.”
This doesn't really answer the question though, right? The real question is if airlines would be willing to invest in the R&D to have stacked seating at all. Personally I'd be fine with it, but I can see a lot of people having problems with it - to say nothing of how expensive it would be to redesign the cabin.
I see airlines buying this, but not to redesign their economy cabin layout, but instead to increase the capacity of their premium cabin.
This would never be used in an economy cabin. The whole point of economy is that at times is so uncomfortable that you have moments where you consider upgrading. If they change this to improve economy, people wouldn’t have a reason for upgrading to an upper cabin.
By this logic, why would airlines even have economy class? Why not just fill whole plane with first clas seats?
The answer of course is that there isn’t enough demand for first class seats, so airlines just fill the remaining space with cheaper, lower margin product. Exactly the same will apply here: if they try to upgrade the whole cabin to this scheme, and try to charge premium prices, other airlines with lower prices cannibalize their customer base. Solve for equilibrium.
Have in mind that I’m not talking about first class. Most airlines nowadays have a medium class with a little bit more leg room and maybe like a complimentary alcoholic drink.
Every time I fly, that class is full.
If this layout gives you an efficient way to increase the capacity of that class without sacrificing the economy capacity that would totally make sense for the airlines, even if they don’t sell that class fully in each flight.
I don’t know if it’s technically feasible since I know airplanes have some weight limitations, but in theory this would be a way to have more seats for a class that is expensive but not prohibitive to the economy passenger.
That class is always full because they bid the price lower and lower offering upgrades to existing passengers and then, if all else fails, they will upgrade status fliers to it for free.
Might be even a bit more cynical they’ll push it as a premium economy option and shrink the economy class even further.
I might have a strong case of selection bias but on nearly every 3-4 class config flight I’ve been on in the past 5 years had business me premium economy classes fully seated whilst economy was 60-80% full.
Business travel is now economy premium by default and nearly everyone else upgrades at the airport.
It seems that charging people $400 during booking then $100 at the checkin twice for upgrades is psychologically easier than charging them $600 when booking.
That’s probably because there are usually more people eligible for free upgrades than there are premium seats. That’s the main reason business is full rather than an excess of people actually paying for it or paid upgrades. It’s certainly not the default for business travel.
These seats appear to replace overhead storage. Say goodbye to your free carryon... a plane full of upcharges can outstrip the handful of people who can afford upgrades.
Of course, if you're 7' tall, I'm betting you can't fit at all. If you're north of 300lb, or 70yo, or have physical disabilities, you might not be able to clamber into the upper seats. I don't think that will impede the airlines though.
If you’re 7’ tall, you can’t really fit into existing economy seats, either, because your knees would need to transect the seat in front of you. At least in this configuration, you can slouch.
There's storage area next to each seat, and this is meant for premium economy and not the whole plane. I doubt oversized or disabled people will be choosing these.
Cannibalizing sales of more-premium seats is something to consider, but another consideration is how they compete against other airlines.
If passengers were to show a strong preference for these seats over traditional premium economy, they might switch airlines. But of course it remains to be seen whether passengers would these better, like them less, or have no strong preference.
Is this actually going to happen or just a proposal? I can't imagine this is going to pass safety standards. You can't even have your bag sticking out in the aisle or a less than able bodied person sitting in the exit row.
Imagine 20 ladders jutting out into the row as passenger frantically exit an aircraft in an emergency.
These are premium economy so 10% of the seats on a 777 or so. This means you can easily avoid any of these at exit rows. Even if these are a huge success, you’d maybe see it on 25% of a cabin.
For safety, it would seem that in order to work you’d just need to show you can evacuate in 90 seconds. Whether that means ladders must be locked in when in an emergency, or that the ladders can be used but the fact you don’t have multiple people in each row makes up for the ladders blocking some space. I’m guessing it’s the former.
Find it utterly bizarre the dozens of comments here about a designer who obviously put a lot of effort in didn't consider the very basics and HN commentators are so enlightened/knowledgeable they can point it out in 15 seconds.
How about this counterpoint: the manufacturer knows exactly about the emergency requirements of an airplane and that's included in the design. An average size male need to half turn sideways going down an economy aisle already.
When not in use these aisles would be a joy due to the buffer space, for both those in transit and those sitting.
The rampant Dunning-Kruger that exists on this forum is honestly quite concerning some days. Take a step back and think whether this company has not dealt with this problem? The onus of proof is on all the commentators saying otherwise.
I was merely asking. But it is not uncommon at all to see marketing drawings like this that have not and have no intention of becoming a reality and so do not go through any kind of safety vetting process.
In other words, in my case, it's not a matter of thinking I know better than some experts. It's that I question whether this has been vetted by any experts at all. It would not be the first time.
I can see myself (to say nothing of the elderly) falling off the stairs on long haul journeys after waking up and needing to go to the bathroom. I can see endless instances of people spilling their hot drinks and food on the stewardess as it's being handed to them. This seems like a downgrade from economy, where at least you can comfortably walk down the aisle and not get inadvertently kicked in the head.
I feel like this is missing something very important -- weight distribution.
Premium economy in my limited experience has been closer to the front. Even if you shift it towards the center, you suddenly have a section of the plane that's far heavier than the rest. (Not to mention higher)
The article was really quite brief, but I'd love to learn how that issue would be addressed.
The claimed weight is 50kg per unit - more than a modern aircraft seat but not dramatically so to the extent it's likely to unbalance anything - and they seat the same number of passengers per metre of cabin. The bigger question is how on earth they expect to get an airline safety certification for something involving passengers sitting high above the cabin floor and accessing the aisle by sliding out ladder in the middle of it
Sorry, I have to disagree here. Trains do not make multi-meter sudden vertical movements.
At any rate, the concern is about egress in an emergency. In a train, every window is an emergency exit. In a plane everyone has to go down the aisle to the nearest exit. The ladders are in the aisle during use and will inhibit that process. They could of course disable the ladders during an emergency so people would have to jump or climb down, but that would certainly lead to injuries and other mishaps that would also inhibit the escape process.
Hard to see the FAA certifying this unless the aisles are made wider. That would reduce overall packing density, so there goes airline's interest in the approach.
It is beautiful in concept. Who wouldn't want to get horizontal during that redeye back to the east coast or the long haul to Japan? Its just hard to see the profitable and safe path to adoption.
This got announced in tandem with a bunk bed design - see Air New Zealand's skynest. You get more comfy bunk beds, but can't really sit. Would be good for overnight long hauls, I think.
The skynest is being proposed as an additional service you can book (not sure if it will be paid or free). So you will have your normal seat, and then get a certain number of hours in the skynest.
It looks a terrible design to me.
I'd rather go for minimal changes to economy seats to improve the "low hanging fruit" problems that humans have when traveling.
An example? Staggered seats to avoid "elbowing" or "shouldering" - common problem in the US where people are "bigger" than elsewhere, compared to e.g. Asia.
Who am I? A CS engineer with ~1,000 flights in the last 12 years, ~97% in economy, all over the world except Antartica. My comment here is simply based on some common sense. No specific skillset.
"elbowing" or "shouldering" could be eliminated by small vertical separators. These doesn't need to be big - just something separating elbow space and shoulder space to prevent spilling one passenger's body over to another's space.
Interesting, but airlines aren't going to invest in upgrading their planes unless they can raise prices (and get more money). Thus, the best case scenario is that this becomes the new business class or something. The success of low-cost carriers like Spirit have shown that people prefer cheap tickets over better service or more comfort.
Maybe they'll take it to an extreme and start stacking the current seats without increasing the amount of personal space.
Correct - the article lists these as premium economy. It may make sense for an airline to replace 15% of sets with these and charge more. I would certainly pay another $100 for one of these on a 12+ hour flight (as would my employer).
I don't usually comment about downvotes, but I'll make an exception, since I used to fly premium economy regularly, and still do for all personal long-haul flights, I know what I said to be true.
I can only assume downvoters are confusing premium economy (the cabin class) with "premium plus" (or other names) that is offered by some airlines, which is nothing more than an economy seat with 1-3" of extra legroom, or sometimes just an economy seat in an exit row.
My biggest "problem" with premium economy is simply that it's always full. My flights are always a week out or less, and every single time it's completely full, leaving me with some near lav middle seat. It's like I want to give them money, but can't.
I don't fly regularly any more, but I did for several years (mostly long haul), and I found the same thing - even if economy was only half-full, premium economy was almost always full.
A side effect also meant it was almost impossible to use airline points to upgrade from economy, since the number of "reward" seats is very limited anyway, and always seems to be "zero" on popular routes.
At the time, I always wished they would increase their premium capacity at the expense of losing some economy seats, which I figured would have reduced the cost of premium economy a bit too.
Same thought I had. It's crazy to me they aren't expanding premium economy row by row til it's not filling up. It's often nearly double the cost, but doesn't nearly take up double the room. I think they'll actually find they can expand to infinity, as consumers are willing to pay money to not suffer.
In a worst case scenario event, I’m not sure I want to have to evacuate from a smoke filled cabin and have a ladder involved in the process. Seems like a risk for falls/breaks/sprains if you’re trying to peace out of the plane quickly.
I'd take that chance any day for a much more comfortable flight. Very rarely do you even have the chance to escape when something is wrong with your plane while it's in the air.
Agreed. With ladders protruding into the walkway, it’s a hazard for the person descending and everyone else behind them in the cabin, and if it’s on both sides of the aircraft, just think of the potential blockages turning regular coach class behind this section into a potential deathtrap.
I think the only serious answer to this issue is to reduce the number of seats everywhere on all flights, raise prices heavily, and let the high prices and scarcity of seating dissuade people from flying except in extreme cases when it’s worth the money.
Especially finding ways to force businesses to do this, and simply refactor to use teleconferencing, regional offices, etc., and stop having commercial business activities that require flights.
> The bottom level is going to sell out immediately, to people who don't require or need it. Look at how many front row or exit seats are taken by short people.
This is easily solved by the market. Either charge a premium for being able to reserve the bottom seat, or auction them off.
> But as someone over 6'5 with knee problems, I curse them silently in my head every time. Same will happen here.
Were those exit seats simply not available because they've been booked, or because you weren't willing to pay the premium?
Sure there exist solutions, but my point was, airlines don't do that today. I'd love to be able to auction on a front row aisle seat!
To your second question, booked of course. My entire point was they'll sell any seat to any person, first come first serve. The bottom would always sell out first, regardless of those who are physically able or not to even sit on top.
Airlines regularly accommodate disabled people. All you need to do is ask, either at booking time or at the airport. Also I'm not sure why you assume the bottom would sell out. I would always choose the top, because then I wouldn't have anyone climbing a ladder next to me, and I'd be farther from people in the aisle.
I'm already being downvoted to oblivion, might as well reply. The fact that airlines cater to disabled people isn't even in question, that much is obvious to anyone who has even seen a plane take off. What's in question is what if a disabled person wants a seat that was sold as a premium to someone else? I'll give you a hint, they won't get it. They have no problem shoveling your disabled body into a terrible seat. Furthermore, not all disabilities are covered. My brother for example nearly died of blood clots, and is on blood thinner forever. If he used this as evidence for a seat with more mobility, he'd be told to pound sand. Keep flagging me, munchkins.
Yeap. I help my mom get onto aircraft because she's semi-disabled. She automatically gets Pre check and a wheelchair for the jet bridge, and then walks on the plane. There's no way she could get into either of those seats because they require too much mobility. Furthermore, there's no way I could sit on the bottom or the top because there's just not enough headroom as I'm very tall in the seated height measurement.
Require airlines to reverse a proportion that can only be sold closer to the flight time (unless to a disabled person) or once the upper section is full. It seems like a solvable problem.
As you note, the problem already exists - I don't see this making it much _worse_. I regularly face a similar problem on trains (I _need_ a seat due to limited mobility, and seats are a scarce resource). The train companies cope - I don't see why airlines companies can't, or couldn't be made to.
If this gets adopted, I give it <10 years before someone has the bright idea to return seat size to current values while doubling capacity by adding the second story.
Pretty much all the margins of a flight come from business class. If you fly economy class, your value to <Airline> comes from walking past business class and maybe being upsold.
I believe the economics have slightly changed with the propagation of premium economy. A significant percent of long haul margins are now coming from this segment.
“The carrier said revenues per square foot are 6 per cent higher than in business class and 33 per cent higher than in economy. ”
You won’t find any major international carrier without a proper business class. Business is so good that it essentially killed first class on all but few routes.
Ticket prices reflects this, with business class around 5x the cost of economy and premium economy splits them in the middle.
Most international flight businesses class experiences are just economy class with very slightly more legroom, earlier boarding, guaranteed use of overhead bins to avoid gate checking bags, and sometimes a really low-quality free alcoholic drink.
5 or 6 years ago it was different and business class had a separate section with much roomier seats with more storage, upgraded entertainment, meals and alcohol options, and for large enough flights sometimes even a separate entrance.
You are right that ticket prices can be 5x economy (probably more like 2x or 3x usually, 5x on crowded flights). But these higher prices are only for the “slightly more legroom and early bin access” tier. The quality has gone down while the prices keep shooting up.
I’ve also noticed that when I paid for business class flights before, if any delays or issues came up for the flight, I would get comprehensive and immediate customer assistance to rectify it, usually even free transfers to more expensive flights or very generous hotel and meal vouchers, no questions asked.
In the last two years I’ve had several issues with flight cancellations or delays and business class fares confer no advantage. No customer support, no free upgrades or transfers, and you have to set your dignity aside and act like a crazy angry person if you want even the smallest concession from the airline on hotel or meal vouchers - and this has been consistent across every major international airline.
> Most international flight businesses class experiences are just economy class with very slightly more legroom
That isn’t true at all. Not on any trans-pacific flight, and not on most trans-Atlantic ones. The only time I can think of business class as being kind of like Economy are on some cheap biz class seats to and from SE Asia (e.g. on HK Express, but even then we got lie flat seats). I’m sure discount international airlines like Norwegian do something similar as well.
This keeps being repeated in this thread, and yet the opposite is true - long haul business today is flat beds and single seats. It’s like first class was 25 years ago.
Would be interesting to hear where you saw business that was just bigger economy seats with better food. Is it simply old planes?
I think you’re conflating premium economy and business class. Business class on the majority of major airlines has displaced international first class, and in every major airline includes lay flat seating pods in a separate cabin for long haul flights. Delta One, United Polaris, etc are business class products, there is no first class on these airlines anymore.
Airlines try to increase margins by selling this (premium economy) already. The reason they can’t sell many of them is because they don’t offer much in return for the added cost. Airlines can offer a better meal and maybe a tiny bit of extra legroom, but airlines can’t charge much for it. For being able to somewhat flat I’d be ready to pay quite a high premium on a 10-15h flight.
Has there ever been a newspaper article "New seat design" that has actually ended up with a new seat design in production?
If there a list of these weekly stories?
Out their idea, anyone can design seats including aircraft manufactures, so if it works they will just do it themselves, except they know what regulations to follow and what passengers will actually want.
How can this possibly work with the (immensely sensible) FAA complete evacuation time rules? It’s already challenging to get people evacuated in a sensible amount of time without people having to use ladders. The ladders make leaving the seat harder as it is, and then you have people going against the evacuation flow (they’re blocking the aisles while they climb down).
One thing that would really help is to charge oversized passengers more than right-sized passengers, and have separate seating areas. One of the most uncomfortable things about flying coach is having to sit next to an oversized person.
Deregulation was a mistake. It turns out that flight paths are a scarce resource, and race to the bottom results in planes that are miserable to fly in. Reregulate the prices, add a carbon tax, and bring back in flight meals.
If by “race to the bottom” you mean making flying more affordable for everyone, then I agree.
Tickets are a fraction of what they were in the 70’s due to deregulation. And in terms of comfort, based on how full flights are, it seem like airlines have struck the right comfort versus price balance.
Why are you assuming more people flying is good? The evidence is that too many people are flying. Now we've made everyone used to a thing that will either be taken away by governments proactively or by nature retributively.
Lower prices and less space per person means more people get to fly. And it's not like air travel is a high-profit industry. Regulating airlines to force them to raise prices and provide more space per customer is obviously evil by any sensible definition. I'm not even some sort of free-market zealot. Forcing an important product to become more exclusionary via regulation to improve the quality for non-marginal users is bad policy and also morally wrong. Raising airfare means that people on the margin are not going to be able to travel to see their dying relatives, visit family on holidays, travel for vacation, etc.
Or maybe people won't move as far from their relatives in the first place. You can't just assume that more flying is better. Flying has complicated effects on society. It also has an effect on the environment, and the evidence there is overwhelming that it is a negative effect.
If people don't like economy seats, they have 3 choices: 1) don't fly at all, 2) upgrade to a premium seat or 3) fly an airline with more economy room.
The vast majority of customers always pick the lowest price.
Coffee? That's not so bad. I'd be worried about it raining vomit. Its already bad enough when fluids start flowing along the floor, hitting the coats and smaller bags stowed below seats.
I wonder if the extra airline profits will cover the possible payout of a lawsuit where a mother's lap baby twists out of her arms and plonks six feet down onto the hard aluminum floor.
I can't wait for the first flyertalk post asking how many air miles they should get as compensation for being urinated on by a passenger overhead, or dealing with a gassy passenger overhead.
This doesn't look like an improvement - I'd feel even more closed in with this configuration.
If you're in a bottom seat, you've got someone's, well, bottom, right in your face - not a very appealing prospect.
They also don't recline, which will make sleeping impossible or very difficult on long haul flights.
I also wonder about this from a safety perspective in the even of an evacuation - I imagine you'd have panicked passengers in the top seats jumping down onto those below.
And finally, even if these seats have a bigger pitch (more leg room) as a concept, airlines will simply cram more in, while keeping the same, horrible pitch of 30-32". That's not a problem with any particular design, of course, but it's what any airline is unfortunately going to do.
> They also don't recline, which will make sleeping impossible or very difficult on long haul flights
None of the static images show it, but at the end of the video it shows that there is space on the window side so that you can actually lie down across you seat with your legs going into that space.
I am a person that struggles to sleep on planes due my length (6"7) and basically never sleep on flights. Especially, when the person decided to recline their seat the whole flight. Which I find really rude to do on a 12 hour flight.
Normally I end up sleeping most of the day when I arrive at my destination. I slept for 24 hours after not sleeping for 32 hours (stopover plus too windy to land) when I flown to NZ.
This is a New Zealand airliner, so it is specifically designed for long haul experiences. You can sleep actually, the seat doesn’t recline, but you can lay down at an angle.
As for safety, I imagine they could just run simulations and then get it validated worth a working prototype.
For the final point, again, its a New Zealand airliner, so they have different constraints at work. Everything is just very far away.
Have you ever tried sleeping on a 15 hour long haul? Reclining seats don’t really work anymore and something lie flat is really appreciated. Most of this seat innovation is coming out of New Zealand for that reason, Air NZ even has a cuddle class (by three seats for two people, get an extension to turn it into a two person bed).
https://vimeo.com/394558118 shows (from 00:33) how it works in more detail. Ladder pulls out from between the seats (although see http://www.zephyrseat.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Zephyr-... for newer built-in ladder design), and arm rest holds upper chair passengers in place. The cushion that completes the bed appears to fold out from just below tray table.
Luggage goes to upper right of seat, so is securely stored and accessible during flight, a win versus traditional overhead lockers. Seat appears to be a little lower than normal. It looks like there is some additional storage space to the right of the footwell.
Main issues I see are slightly awkward banana shaped sleeping position, and the safety issue for evacuating top deck. The updated built-in ladder design might be sufficient for able-bodied passengers to evacuate quickly enough.
This would be much more attractive than existing premium economy to me and would compete well with business. The main differentiator of business that interests me is the lie-flat bed; the enhanced service and food / beverages, lounge access, and priority boarding and luggage delivery is less important.
More details at http://www.zephyrseat.com/, a few additional videos here http://www.zephyrseat.com/about/ and further pictures here http://www.zephyrseat.com/work/
An alternative flat bed in a premium economy cabin with half the density is described here https://thepointsguy.com/news/new-design-premium-economy-fla...