If airlines do this Amtrak will never have a free seat

[Gratt]

How crazy can you go?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/09/14/skyrider.compact.seats/index.html?hpt=C2

The SkyRider seat, developed by Italian firm Aviointeriors, would offer airlines a way to squeeze in more passengers by reducing the space between rows of seatbacks to just 23 inches. The seat pitch in most airlines' economy class cabins is 30 to 32 inches.

If the Airlines try to pull this stunt even on small corridors watch people jump to Amtrak trains whenever they can. Who knows? This could be the thing that saves passenger rail in America.

 

[Long Train Runnin']

I understand you concern, but if you read the whole article no one is expecting this to catch on here in the US. Its obscene, but not going to catch on.

 

[LA Resident]

I understand you concern, but if you read the whole article no one is expecting this to catch on here in the US. Its obscene, but not going to catch on.

Maybe Amtrak could put in a tiny little seat with 23 inches of leg room for the Acela attendants who like to take up 2 or 3 seats with their luggage and stuff!! :lol:

 

[DivMiler]

I understand you concern, but if you read the whole article no one is expecting this to catch on here in the US. Its obscene, but not going to catch on.

Yep, just like charging to bring on a carry-on or to check a bag...

 

[bretton88]

No, no. This is exactly what a Ryanair would do, but, it will probably never get safety approval in the USA. I'd also like to think our airlines are more scrupulous than outfits like Ryanair.

 

[afigg]

No, no. This is exactly what a Ryanair would do, but, it will probably never get safety approval in the USA. I'd also like to think our airlines are more scrupulous than outfits like Ryanair.

Yea, I don't see the FAA approving these seats for use on airliners operating in the US because of the requirements to evacuate an airplane in a minimum amount of time. Squeezing an extra 20 or 30 (40?) people into a 737 is likely to be a problem in meeting the safety requirements.

But I think you are way too optimistic about the US airlines having more scruples than Ryanair. h34r:

 

[sechs]

I imagine that using these seats in something like a 737 would require another flight attendant.

Jetblue pulled seats from their A320s so as to avoid needing that fourth person.

 

[amamba]

The FAA has already said that the seat does not meet US safety standards.

 

[OlympianHiawatha]

The FAA has already said that the seat does not meet US safety standards.

Give the airlines time and they'll probably manage to get that approval forced through.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

If airlines do this Amtrak will never have a free seat...This could be the thing that saves passenger rail in America.

This brings up something I've wondered for a while now. If Amtrak sells every single seat would they then become profitable?

Its obscene, but not going to catch on.

No. Child trafficking is obscene. Sitting in an uncomfortable seat for a couple hours is merely annoying.

I'd also like to think our airlines are more scrupulous than outfits like Ryanair.

That may very well be true, but it's really not saying much. We also have a Ryanair wannabe in the form of Spirit Airlines.

I imagine that using these seats in something like a 737 would require another flight attendant.

I agree that this is likely to be the primary obstacle in the short term. However, it's quite possible there will be at least one or two aircraft where all the numbers will line up well enough for a trial run. That's not to say I expect a quick entry into the North American market, but given enough time we might begin to see seats much closer than the current designs. I mean, the seats we fly in today are very similar to the seats I flew in as a kid. Eventually they're going to adopt a newer model designed to increase revenue. At a minimum the new seats will be lighter and thinner and will pack in more people even before the pitch is changed.

 

[Cho Cho Charlie]

Gee, when I read that article, my first thoughts were that, OK, no airline is interested, but what about High Speed Rail here in the USA? Gee, 200 or 300 passengers in high speed consist of what, two cars? :giggle:

 

[alanh]

This gimmick comes up every few years, and nothing ever comes of it. Someone sees standing-room on mass transit and tries to find a way for this to work on an aircraft.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Gee, when I read that article, my first thoughts were that, OK, no airline is interested, but what about High Speed Rail here in the USA?

That brings up another question. What if Amtrak reduced seat pitch and put in some more seats? I would be okay with less pitch if Amtrak was willing and able to speed up their timetables.

 

[bretton88]

Actually, Amtraks new car specs actually call for a thinner seat so they can maximize seating. The specs actually spell out the ways that they can do that, such as thinner seat backs.

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

Actually, Amtraks new car specs actually call for a thinner seat so they can maximize seating. The specs actually spell out the ways that they can do that, such as thinner seat backs.

It also listed the minimum seat pitch, which was the same as on the current equipment. Space will remain the same, if they can thin out the seats they might fit one more row.

 

[FriskyFL]

If Ryanair could remove ALL seats and replace them with grab rails, they'd do it...and the sheeple that fly that so-called airline would barely complain.

 

[Big Iron]

If airlines do this Amtrak will never have a free seat...This could be the thing that saves passenger rail in America.

This brings up something I've wondered for a while now. If Amtrak sells every single seat would they then become profitable?

Its obscene, but not going to catch on.

No. Child trafficking is obscene. Sitting in an uncomfortable seat for a couple hours is merely annoying.

I'd also like to think our airlines are more scrupulous than outfits like Ryanair.

That may very well be true, but it's really not saying much. We also have a Ryanair wannabe in the form of Spirit Airlines.

I imagine that using these seats in something like a 737 would require another flight attendant.

I agree that this is likely to be the primary obstacle in the short term. However, it's quite possible there will be at least one or two aircraft where all the numbers will line up well enough for a trial run. That's not to say I expect a quick entry into the North American market, but given enough time we might begin to see seats much closer than the current designs. I mean, the seats we fly in today are very similar to the seats I flew in as a kid. Eventually they're going to adopt a newer model designed to increase revenue. At a minimum the new seats will be lighter and thinner and will pack in more people even before the pitch is changed.

You can bet that design engineers for all of the aircraft manufacturers are working on this. True it would not "fly" in the US, think of India where the population is so dense that they have to hang on the outside of trains/busses to get where they are going. Some would consider this a positive development. Me, leave wll enough alone, its already getting harder, and more expensive, to find a coach seat on Amtrak.

 

[spacecadet]

That brings up another question. What if Amtrak reduced seat pitch and put in some more seats? I would be okay with less pitch if Amtrak was willing and able to speed up their timetables.

I wouldn't. There is such a thing as "perceived value", which is marketing 101 and it's also something most of the airlines are terrible about, and probably the main reason they're doing so poorly right now.

When you downgrade service quality, you also downgrade the amount that the public thinks that service is worth. And this is a losing battle, because as everyone knows, the higher the prices you can charge, the greater the profit even if your margins stay the same. The best business strategy is almost always to find a way to charge the maximum amount possible while still running at maximum capacity. Increasing capacity while decreasing revenue per passenger is a terrible strategy, as the airlines are finding out.

It also turns into a vicious cycle, because the lower your revenues, the more services you have to cut, which means the lower your fares go, which means more service cuts, ad infinitum. Amtrak would be somewhat immune to this because they're subsidized, but they'd still probably have some 'splaining to do to congress about why they're carrying more passengers and making less money.

Amtrak's seats are obscenely big, so I wouldn't have a problem with them using some thinner seats at the same pitch and squeezing in another couple of rows that way. I'm hoping that's what they're doing on their new cars (I've seen the seat pitch of the new cars, but I'm not sure what the seat pitch of the Amfleet cars is to compare it). But anything that degrades quality is going to decrease the fares they can charge, which is never a good thing. They should be finding ways they can increase fares without losing customers, and that means improving service. Look at Acela Express, which is high speed and all BC and FC - it's very successful.

I'll just say also that in Japan, where people are shorter on average (and pretty much everything smaller than here), standard coach seat pitch on most shinkansen train sets is equivalent to first class seat pitch on Acela Express. The seats themselves are a lot smaller, but the amount of legroom is tremendous. And people pay a premium to ride those trains vs. flying.

Edit: oh, I almost forgot! About those seats in the original post - they *can't* ever happen because most airliners are already configured to carry the maximum number of seats for which they're certified, and there are all sorts of impossibilities about recertifying airplanes for more seats (evacuation rules, maximum takeoff and landing weights, seat strength, fuel efficiency with the extra weight, etc.). So this will never, ever happen, on any airline flying modern, large airliners. Maybe it could happen on some light, overpowered prop planes that otherwise only carry 15 people or so, and they want to squeeze in 3 or 4 more.

 

[Trogdor]

If Amtrak sells every single seat would they then become profitable?

There's no easy answer to that. The real answer depends on the fare at which the seat was sold. Sell them all for $1 - no. Sell them all for $1000 each, then certainly yes.

Given that most available seats are unsold during off-peak times, when the prevailing fares tend to be lowest, you'd really have to make some guesses or assumptions about what the fare would be for the seat sold.

Actually, Amtraks new car specs actually call for a thinner seat so they can maximize seating. The specs actually spell out the ways that they can do that, such as thinner seat backs.

It also listed the minimum seat pitch, which was the same as on the current equipment. Space will remain the same, if they can thin out the seats they might fit one more row.

Seat pitch is the distance from a point on one seat to the same point on the next seat. It is not dependent on the size of the seat in question. So, creating a thinner seat would not allow for more seats unless seat pitch also changes. So, if they use thinner seats, then a passenger's legroom/available space would increase for the same seat pitch.

Look at Acela Express, which is high speed and all BC and FC - it's very successful.

Acela Express business class is just a marketing term. Otherwise, the seating and service is the same as coach on any other train.

Edit: oh, I almost forgot! About those seats in the original post - they *can't* ever happen because most airliners are already configured to carry the maximum number of seats for which they're certified, and there are all sorts of impossibilities about recertifying airplanes for more seats (evacuation rules, maximum takeoff and landing weights, seat strength, fuel efficiency with the extra weight, etc.). So this will never, ever happen, on any airline flying modern, large airliners. Maybe it could happen on some light, overpowered prop planes that otherwise only carry 15 people or so, and they want to squeeze in 3 or 4 more.

First of all, most airliners are not configured to carry the maximum number of seats for which they're certified. Southwest Airlines, for example, puts 137 seats in their 737-300 and 737-700 series airplanes (all economy configuration). That airplane actually has a maximum certified capacity of 149 passengers.

Not to mention, any carrier that offers any sort of premium seating (first class/business class, economy plus, or whatever) is already not going to be configuring their planes to the maximum capacity since they're trading potential capacity for greater comfort up front.

I'm not going to speculate on whether or not such a seating style would ever catch on (in the US or elsewhere), but it's certainly not impossible to add seating capacity to most large (>100 seats) airliners out there. In fact, I'd say your last example is the least likely place that such could happen. I'm not sure what, if any, light airplanes with a 15-passenger capacity would be "overpowered" enough to increase its payload by 20-25%. The smaller/lighter the plane is, the less likely it is to have spare power or carrying capacity to add 3 or 4 people. Most smaller airliners (which would include anything up to your 50- to 70-seat regional jets) are already configured for their maximum certified capacity, and tend to suffer more weight restrictions that would make adding passengers a more difficult proposition. On the other hand, a 737 certified for 149 passengers could, conceivably, have 20-30 first-class seats for premium fare paying passengers, 30 premium coach seats (extra legroom), 70-80 standard coach seats, and the balance with the type of seat proposed in the above article, just to mop-up the bottom of the market.

Now, whether we are likely to see such a configuration is anyone's guess. But it is definitely possible.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Look at Acela Express, which is high speed and all BC and FC - it's very successful.

Yeah, I'd be happy with Acela Express and I'd give up the huge oversized seats on the "Superliners" in exchange for fast and efficient travel in a smaller seat. Unfortunately the nearest Acela stop is well over 1500 miles from here.

I'll just say also that in Japan, where people are shorter on average (and pretty much everything smaller than here), standard coach seat pitch on most shinkansen train sets is equivalent to first class seat pitch on Acela Express. The seats themselves are a lot smaller, but the amount of legroom is tremendous. And people pay a premium to ride those trains vs. flying.

Yeah, I didn't have any problem with riding any of the trains in Japan, and I'm a very tall guy by their standards. The trips are quick and the trains don't waste tons of space on huge and inefficient seats like I'm used to here.

About those seats in the original post - they *can't* ever happen because most airliners are already configured to carry the maximum number of seats for which they're certified, and there are all sorts of impossibilities about recertifying airplanes for more seats (evacuation rules, maximum takeoff and landing weights, seat strength, fuel efficiency with the extra weight, etc.). So this will never, ever happen, on any airline flying modern, large airliners.

As trogdor said it's actually almost the exact opposite. Most large commercial aircraft are certified to carry more seats without suffering additional regulatory hurtles while much smaller aircraft would quickly exceed design specifications and suffer weight penalties and related complications with even minor changes in seat numbers. There are situations where large aircraft would not be able to carry any more seats but it's generally more of a routing issue than a certification issue. For many commercial aircraft seat numbers are as much about labor costs as anything else. As the ratio of attendants to passengers is hardware independent many aircraft of differing certified maximums will be flown with a similar number of seats just below the cut-off point that would necessitate carrying another attendant.