Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

43% Positive

Analyzed from 1979 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#seat#seats#more#economy#aisle#flight#airline#front#don#windows

Discussion (45 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

baaronabout 2 hours ago
Main points:

- "seats measure up to 18-inches wide in economy, the same standard configuration found on Airbus widebody aircraft"

- "To minimise cabin pressure effects on the body, the cabin maintains a 6,000-feet average altitude pressure, roughly equivalent to that of a mountain ski town. This is the same cabin pressure as the modern A350 widebody, and it helps to reduce physical fatigue, headaches and jet lag."

- "Modern next-generation LED lighting systems aboard the A321XLR gently transition through customised hues, mimicking natural sunrises and sunsets to help reset the body’s circadian rhythm. Temperature control is split into three actively controlled zones, and airlines can even opt for heated floor panels to give passengers an extra touch of cozy luxury. Last but not least, advanced acoustic technologies have been integrated through the aircraft’s frame to minimise engine noise, resulting in a 50% noise footprint reduction compared to previous-generation single-aisle aircraft."

lbrinerabout 2 hours ago
I've always wondered why airlines are so bad at managing jet lag for passengers. On a long-haul with Virgin Airways from SFO to LHR, instead of telling people to sleep early in the flight and waking them up for food before arriving at Heathrow at 12pm local time. They kept everyone up for hours with food and then let them sleep for about 2 hours before waking people up for arrival at 12pm.

Weird. My general approach is to switch to destination time as soon as I am seated and then act like I am in the destination timezone. Sleep as best I can if it is night at the destination and force myself awake if it is still day time. Seems much easier to synchronize that way.

The LEDs might work well though if they have been designed to do the job.

vlovich123about 2 hours ago
Generally your body can only adjust 1 hour per day (varies by direction of travel). So shifting at the start of your travel is a bit late. You probably want to shift gradually a few days before travel if it’s a major shift.
rcontiabout 1 hour ago
But that argues equally strongly for what the parent suggests in terms of flight meal/sleep timing.
advisedwang29 minutes ago
Generally because they prioritize ease of operations over helping customers overcome jetlag. In this particular situation I'd guess the ease of operation comes from:

* full customers are easier to deal with than hungry customers

* Doing meal service early avoids the risk that weather turns rough, making a late meal service hard/impossible.

* Crews are fresher earlier in the flight, and so are do a better job and prefer doing meals early.

* Waking customers up is extra work for crews, and may not be wanted by passengers.

gruez26 minutes ago
>They kept everyone up for hours with food and then let them sleep for about 2 hours before waking people up for arrival at 12pm.

Weird, must be airline specific? All the intercontinental flights I've taken recently follows a "take-off -> food -> dark -> food -> landing" schedule, regardless of what time it is outside.

raverbashingabout 1 hour ago
Yeah there's no way you're going to fix the jet lag on SFO-LHR or any similar city pair in one day
rcontiabout 1 hour ago
My dislike for single aisle aircraft isn't about cabin pressure or the "impression of a wider open space". It's about the fact that it is ACTUALLY cramped, and the _one_ aisle will be blocked for most of the flight.

In a typical single aisle airplane, sitting in coach, you're expected to use the restroom "in your cabin" which is at the rear. If you're sitting anywhere _except_ the rear, your access to the restroom will be blocked for a significant portion of shorter flights by food/bev carts.

By contrast, on a widebody, there are restrooms front and rear. If your access to one is blocked, you can go the other way, and you can _also_ use the front or rear to access the _other_ aisle. It's the difference between feeling totally confined versus freedom to move about (other than having to hassle any passengers between yourself and the aisle).

I admit, with limited cabin service in economy, on a longer flight, the blocked aisle isn't such an issue -- but on the typical 1.5-3h narrowbody flight, the food/bev service does seem to be a significant obstruction.

I'm someone who would happily pay up for a lie-flat more frequently if it was priced at 2-3x a regular ticket rather than 5x+. Airlines are slowly expanding premium cabins, and I'd be hopeful that narrowbodies like this permit further growth, but the demand seems to be increasing faster than the supply, so the prices are still crazy.

nexus7556about 1 hour ago
The new, larger narrowbodies are adding a lav at the front of economy which helps with this. https://www.united.com/en/us/fly/company/aircraft/boeing-737...
tedd4u32 minutes ago
True, but it's not all roses. If you like to sit at the front of economy to exit as fast as possible when arriving, you will be sitting next to a heavily-used lav which is not enjoyable. You have to sit 4-6 rows back from the lav to avoid the annoyance.
cwmmaabout 1 hour ago
Is there a term for a product which is really only really for a minority of it's users?

Air travel seems like this as most airlines and manufacturers seem to bend over backwards for their wealthy and high margin passengers and basically treat economy class as "fine I guess we'll throw the rest of you in the back"

Mobile games seem the apotheosis of this as a lot of games are really about finding whales and any enjoyment anyone else has is really an accidental side effect.

datakan41 minutes ago
Airlines treat people like cattle then wonder why people behave like animals. I just did a cross country trip, about 4 hours per hop. I was so sore after that I've basically sworn off traveling that way ever again.

You can tell they keep removing space to fit more bodies in at all costs because they don't even try to line up seats with windows anymore. Multiple seats had windows in places that made them basically useless and one seat from what I could tell had two windows just due to the placement.

Don't even get me started on the cart that goes up the aisle handing out dry cookies to everyone followed by the person with a trash bag coming along to gather it from you.

I had school buses as a kid that were more comfortable and the people better behaved.

wat1000036 minutes ago
It's worth remembering that the airline market is very competitive and this happens because it matches consumer preferences. Yes, nobody wants to be crammed into a tiny seat. But given the choice between a large seat or a tiny seat that costs $5 less, people reliably choose to save $5. The only reason the experience is so miserable is because the flying public will accept nearly anything to save a little money.

It's also worth remembering that there are various premium options available. You can pay extra for economy plus or really splurge on business/first. "That's too expensive" OK well you made your choice....

Analemma_28 minutes ago
Everybody but the wealthy shops for airline tickets with price as their only criterion. Airlines are rational agents who operate in a famously competitive and low-margin business, so they respond to this demand-- indeed, they don't have any choice.

I have a lot of complaints about products and services that I can chalk up to various market failures or sinister actors, but poor airline experience is entirely on us, the consumer. Our revealed preference is for the lowest possible ticket price all else be damned.

alistairSHabout 1 hour ago
We flew from IAD to DUB on Aer Lingus a month ago. Outbound was an A321neo LR/XLR and it was not bad at all. Legroom was fine (for me at 5'7"), big overhead bins should be required these days, and the entertainment setup was passable. The only complaint was flaky seat-back trays that required a real SLAM to latch. The damn things were constantly dropping down, getting slammed back not quite hard enough, and falling again. Not all of them, but enough it was noticeable.

Return was on their A330, which was noticeable worse in every way EXCEPT it's 2-4-2 seatings, so we had a pair of outside seats to ourselves, where on the A321, it's 3-3, so you have a neighbor in the window seat.

4fterd4rk22 minutes ago
The pressurization system being improved is the only thing of note in this promotional material that is for some reason on HN.
cpgxiiiabout 1 hour ago
Not covered: the inevitable even-smaller lavatory to further insult the dignity of the flying public.

At this point, the designers of narrow-body interiors should be actively shamed for how hostile they have made lavatory designs. In a world in which every major flying population is aging and more overweight, yet every generation of airplane lavatories is even narrower and less accessible for everyone.

pudgywalshabout 1 hour ago
Because everyone sleeps soundly with bright blue LED lighting blaring in their faces.

I fail to see what's innovative about "we shoved business class seats into a narrow-body aircraft".

An A321 is still an A321.

Flying internationally in a single-aisle aircraft is under any circumstances torture no matter how you sugar coat it: "Come fly in our modern, innovative sardine can."

By the way BA did this years ago with their London City A318 which doesn't exist anymore because it was a failure that merely burned money.

alistairSH37 minutes ago
That flight was an odd bird from the outset. It didn't have the range to make NY in a single go, so it stopped in Shannon Ireland to refuel, where passengers deplaned, went through US Preclearance, and rebounded. IIRC, the US->UK return was non-stop. So one leg was longer than normal. Ultimately, it was dying on it's own when COVID drove the final nail into the coffin.
wat1000035 minutes ago
I never understood why the airplane size matters so much to an individual passenger. What's the difference to me, as a standard economy passenger, between flying internationally in an A321 or a 787? I have the same tiny seat either way. My knees are crammed into the next seat's back the same on both. I see this sentiment stated frequently and I just don't get it.
gregdaniels421about 1 hour ago
The first class seats look like a nightmare if you have kids.
infectoabout 1 hour ago
In what way? So many international first class seats are similar to this already. Either there is a massive barrier between seats or separated.
rcontiabout 1 hour ago
They're a nightmare if someone else has kids, too!
krunckabout 2 hours ago
How about seats that are adjustable to fit small people. I'm sick of sitting in seats with concave lumbar regions. It tears up my back. I know, I know, the seats need to accommodate large, more spherical people. Cant there be an adjustable lumbar support though?
seanosaurabout 2 hours ago
Any time you say "adjustable" the manufacturer and operator only here "heavier" which translates to "more expensive to operate."
rcontiabout 1 hour ago
My wife's short so she's actually quite uncomfortable in a business class seat unless it's reclined-- seat bottom length is an issue for her, sometimes even in economy. On the flipside, I'm of pretty average height, but the flat seat cushions mean I always feel like I'm sitting awkwardly on my tailbone. I wonder why they couldn't just be more like a car seat, with some thigh support. I'm not sure I've ever been in a car seat less comfortable than the _best_ economy airline seat.
sassbadgerabout 2 hours ago
Seats are airline equipment. They depend on the airline and it's suppliers and are optionally assembled by Airbus.
neonstaticabout 2 hours ago
Since we are voicing seat related complaints, I want seats that don't recline. I don't want that asshole in front of me ruining my flight again.
asdffabout 1 hour ago
I don't get the griping with the reclining. I see it all over reddit and here. Never in real life. It has never affected my life in the least bit to have someone in the seat ahead of me recline their seat. It doesn't affect knee room at all. You lose what maybe 3 inches of dead air space if that at the top of their seat.
mitthrowaway2about 1 hour ago
You could consider sitting in an exit row. The seats in front of that row are typically prohibited from reclining in order not to block the exit. Or you can sit behind a bulkhead.
SlightlyLeftPadabout 1 hour ago
Fly on Ryanair
FergusArgyllabout 1 hour ago
I don't get this attitude. The seats are meant to recline, as soon as takeoff is finished I recline. If you want more space, you should too.
OxO428 minutes ago
If you are tall, then no amount of reclining is going to give you more space. The knees are too far forward to stretch your legs, _especially_ when the person in front of you reclines.

In other words, you are inconsiderate.

ceejayoz35 minutes ago
Yeah, I'm six foot, always in the most basic economy, and never once has the person in front reclining impacted me.

It feels like the same phenomenon when people bitched and moaned about having to take even the slightest COVID precautions.

cryo32about 2 hours ago
Can still hear the person snoring opposite.
r2sk5tabout 2 hours ago
lol
gib444about 1 hour ago
Remember that airlines almost always opt for the more cramped and cheaper variants of interiors, asking "ok but how do we fit even more cattle in here?"
wat1000033 minutes ago
But also remember that airline customers also opt for the more cramped and cheaper variants.
Advertisement
w4yaiabout 2 hours ago
Ah, look at all these things I will never be able to afford
mrtksnabout 2 hours ago
Maybe its due to the lessons learned, the extreme conservatism in air travel should be up to a disruption. It's nice that they make blue light to look like the sky but:

1) The windows are disappointing. This is, I think, due to the fatigue caused by large rectangular windows that previously caused a disaster but it begs for improvement. A way to make large windows or get rid of all the windows and use very high definition screens to imitate windows with live footage would be nicer

2) Noise is still a problem. I am sure they are trying hard, even the engines are designed around addressing the noise issue but it would be a huge improvement to have this solved. ANC maybe?

3) Automate the pilot out. This is I believe an area where plane makers are pioneers but we still got pilots, I would love to see flying with a plane becoming about the same as taking an elevator.

IMHO travel times are reasonable, the improvements in comfort, cost and practicality are due. Airports themselves too are due for an overhaul, it shouldn't be taking hours to get on a travel machine.

trollbridgeabout 2 hours ago
It only takes hours for administrative reasons. Pre-COVID, I used to show up at IAD 25 minutes before departure time when I knew security would be fast and I could get right to my gate.

Overall, facilities that handle millions of people tend to have a lot of "standing in line" and the slightest disruptions can mean you'll be standing in line for an extra hour.

iSnowabout 1 hour ago
> Automate the pilot out.

That's a complete non-starter for now and the next decades. Fully automated operation for 1-dimensional transport (trains) is a solved issue, for 2D, not so much and most certainly not for 3D.

Even though modern planes are very reliable, too many things can go wrong during flight to leave it to a machine - and for what? Just for bragging rights?

datakan36 minutes ago
There are whole fleets of unmanned drones being flown by the military today
advisedwang26 minutes ago
Most of them still have remote operators.