3
0

FAA wants to shrink airline seats even further


               
2017 Jul 31, 1:33pm   1,407 views  23 comments

by tovarichpeter   follow (7)  

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2017/07/31/citing-basic-physics-a-judge-berated-the-faa-for-those-shrinking-airline-seats/?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories-2_gridlock-judge-1235pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.4cd5cadfbd7b

look into it what she calledthe Case of the Incredible Shrinking Airline Seat. Judge Patricia Millett upbraided the FAAfor vacuousand vaporous evidence that the agency previously used to argue that diminishing leg room was not a problem or at least not its problem. Its no secret that the big carriershave been shrinking seatspace. CNN reported earlier this year that American Airlines was preparing to retrofit its fleet of Boeing 737 Max jets with less room for economy fliers, for example. United Airlines was reportedly thinking about doing likewise, even as

« First        Comments 20 - 23 of 23        Search these comments

21   WookieMan   2025 May 22, 3:00pm  

MolotovCocktail says





Won't happen. Even lightweight passengers are a lot of weight. Figure a carry on? Checked bag? If you increase capacity 20% these planes were not designed for that weight. They'd have to install new engines that would take 5-10 years to recoup the costs of the engines and new seats. Then passenger satisfaction would go way down.

Maybe it would work in Europe, but not working in the states. If it's a dedicated short route and the plane needs work, you're screwed and lose money on those short routes. Potentially for weeks. I'm not riding one of those going to San Diego or Puerto Rico.
22   MolotovCocktail   2025 May 22, 4:14pm  

WookieMan says


They'd have to install new engines that would take 5-10 years to recoup the costs of the engines and new seats. Then passenger satisfaction would go way


The seats weigh 50% less, so no new engines. They plan on saving fuel, actually.

WookieMan says


Then passenger satisfaction would go way down


Since when do they give a shit? Especially United.

WookieMan says


I'm not riding one of those going to San Diego or Puerto Rico.


They are supposedly only going to be used for flights 20 min or less. Basically flying busses crammed like an Asian subway car.

But I agree. I am not sure this dog will hunt in the US even if the FAA will approve.
23   WookieMan   2025 May 22, 7:27pm  

MolotovCocktail says

WookieMan says

They'd have to install new engines that would take 5-10 years to recoup the costs of the engines and new seats. Then passenger satisfaction would go way

The seats weigh 50% less, so no new engines. They plan on saving fuel, actually.

Human weight. https://www.healthyforlifemeals.com/blog/average-weight-of-men-women#:~:text=Average%20Weight%20and%20Body%20Mass,for%20women%20is%20170.8%20pounds.

170lbs for women and 200lbs for men. This negates the weight savings of a seat if they have carry on or a checked bag. The seats don't weigh that much anyway. Humans do. Pack more humans in and the balances get off. Just because the seats are "deemed" safe doesn't mean the plane is.

This might go in Europe or somewhere else, but in the US it's easier to drive instead of 1 hour or less flights. I can drive to St. Louis or Minneapolis in 4-5 hours on a tank of gas. Not getting on a plane that makes me stand up that will ultimately charge the same rates. This might be a top 10 dumbest ideas I've seen. Loser that can't afford flight except once every 10 years will bite at it though.

« First        Comments 20 - 23 of 23        Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   users   suggestions   gaiste