Pretty soon they're just going to roofie people and pack them into planes like sardines.
Multipass!
Honestly it's like teleporting then so I'm on board.
They could just tip the nose of the plane 90 degrees in the air and then have a slide or funnel that dumps you into the fuselage. You'll just want to be sure to buy first-class tickets so that you'll be at the top of the pile.
Get a tamper to pack em in a little
A la Fifth Element.
Why did they say if like it was a bad thing? I want this to be a thing.
I think they should just have rows of bunk beds. It's much easier to stack something flat than people with their awkward bends at the hips and knees.
unsurprisingly the ship and train industry figured this shit out like literally a century ago
Where are the overhead baggage bins?
No carry-on bags?
If they go in the hold, how do you make it bigger?
This design is similar but not the same as OG post. Although still shitty, its quite an improvement over the orgional.
Those steps DEFINITELY aren't a safety hazard.
The newer version from the link looks less bad than this picture, but still dystopian as fuck. We need to make airline travel cheaper somehow rather than having the airline industry come up with their own ideas to try and pack people in like cattle.
Cheaper? What kinda crack are you smoking? Shit is destroying the planet, it needs to be a LOT more expensive.
what kind of crack are YOU smoking? So practically "banning" poor people for traveling anywhere further than 500km than their hometown is the solution? And allow rich people go on as usual?
The not-wealthy will be the only ones affected by this. Business people were traveling since the birth of the aviation and will continue travelling. This will be just an increased cost in their cost planning.
So if you're rich you're allowed to destroy the planet. If you're poor stay at home, the planet is in danger.
Uh, you know, it is possible to care about two things at once. Wanting airline travel to be cheaper/more comfortable and also less environmentally unfriendly are not mutually exclusive positions.
As others have pointed out, making it more expensive isn't going to get rid of air travel, it'll just be reserved for the ultra-wealthy who will not give a damn either way.
We could subsidize biofuels. Just spitballing.
I agree, but it's mostly the Uber wealthy, not regular travelers. It's bad, but it's not that bad. Using a whole plane to carry one or two people is horrible though.
You get points for being an environmentalist but lose points for accusing any differing opinion of being the result of drug use. That cliche is often used on autistic people to attack them for thinking differently. You should try making your point without cliches.
I don't think he meant that literally.
Yeah, that's usually how people use cliches. They hear something and think it sounds quippy in a rhetorical sense, even if it's not what they mean. It's a lazy way of participating in a conversation without actually putting forward any ideas of your own. It's the death of sincerity.
What I'm reading is you just fail to understand anything that isn't literal.
This extra passenger density would make it cheaper per person, right? More fuel efficient, too.
Looking over my original post, perhaps my phrasing wasn't clear. Yes, this is one way to decrease costs, but it comes at the expense of comfort. Airline companies are no stranger to this process, and have been rolling out new methods of packing as many passengers onto a plane as physically possible since the very first commercial airplanes took flight.
Awkward and regressive ideas like this, where the airlines are contemplating stacking people in uncomfortable looking double-decker seating to save precious inches of space are only coming out now because no significant strides have been made in making air travel less expensive to operate as a whole. It is always going to be easier to shave off a few inches of legroom and pack in another row of seating in the next generation of jet airliner than it is to invent a new type of jet fuel that is cheaper and burns cleaner without sacrificing performance, or developing a new more efficient fuselage that can fly just as far as a conventional plane while carrying less fuel, etc.
It would be nice to see air travel improve for a change, rather than continue to get worse and worse over time out of necessity.
Not sure if you're just joking, but plenty of people survive plane crashes. Most crashes aren't just a plane falling out of the sky at full speed. Survival rates are around 95%.
Generally speaking, plane crashes are like train crashes. Either most everyone survives, or most everyone dies pretty quickly, with very little in between.
Imagine this plane with a fire on board before takeoff and now the unfit overweight masses have to evacuate.
Imagine a new meaning to the phrase "upper decker".
at that point just give me general anaesthesia and put me in an airline shipping coffin so at least i don't have to be conscious for the horror show
Someone somewhere just pulled out some graph paper and is sketching a concept.
12 hour flight. The fail-safes fail. Something goes wrong with the anesthesia and you're awake for the entire thing
I woke up in the middle of my wisdom teeth surgery so I of all people oughtta know better lol
Still better hab Ryanair!
I fly often for work, stay up the whole night before and cannabis. Flying is easy now.
As someone who doesn't have claustrophobia, I feel claustrophobic just looking at this. Then again, I've never been on a plane before, and for all I know this might be better :/
I had very bad claustrophobia the time I got rolled in a carpet with only my head sticking out or the time I got closed in a trunk. Flew around 12 times on airplanes and they are mostly just uncomfortable and annoying. Maybe I grew out of it π€·
Are you a cartoon or something?
Huh?
Getting locked in a trunk and rolled up into a carpet with your head sticking out just sounds like someone Wile e coyote would count as normal life experiences. Bonus points if you hopped away off screen after getting rolled in the carpet.
I got rolled into our floor rug as a kid, we were messing around and I thought it would be funny. It was not and a panic attack was had.
Who keeps abducting you?!
I think theres just so much shit going on in an airplane that the brain short circuits and doesnt think about the fact that you are in a disturbingly thin walled, air sealed aluminium can hurtling through the sky at 800+kph with a hundred other people, most of whom dont have the common sense the gods gave a common rock, and are riddled with disease that you are no doubt being exposed to due to being crammed in like sardines.
I agree it sucks but most of the time I am just hoping that the plane doesn't crash, and I am a pretty anxious person, other than that my headphones are in and I'm either listening to music or watching a something and looking out the window :p
The leg room is better but scooting into the window seat will be slightly harder. Hard telling if you can put your feet down in this set up though.
The leg room is different, but it isn't better. There's about the same amount of usable space. I'd prefer the classic chair setup I think.
Just looks way too low clearance. Can't put up your knees, can't put one leg over the other, can't lay on the side. Who can keep their legs straight like this for 10h. If it had like double the clearance I'd love this.
Alternatively, have it totally flat under some chairs maybe? Have the option for a bed or a chair basically.
That doesn't actually look to bad considering what we have today
Right at fart smelling level
In a sealed pressurised container I'd assume fart smelling was mandatory.
She's smiling, so you know it's all okay
don't think of the farts don't think of the farts don't think of the farts don't think of the farts don't think of the farts
These people smile like they've never rode in an airplane with more than 3 people
Why does she look so happy?
Paid model or executive. They're trying to sell the concept.
Yeah, I would assume so. It was kind of a rhetorical question - this looks very much staged.
she has a secret fetish for strangers powering farts directly into her face while being confined so tightly as to feel buried alive.
She's able to stretch her legs?
Sure, she is most likely not particularly tall, but the only saving grace I can see for a setup like this would be more space to stretch your legs out.
Ah, who am I kidding, they would still bunch it impossibly close..
Better be because her ticket from Seoul to San Francisco was just $35
She eats ass.
"why do people prefer trains??"
Honestly I wish that was the case in the US.
For most people, trains are not a alternative.
Often trains cost more. Many train stations are messes and share space with busses.
I desperately want to take a train anywhere. BUT
A) It always costs at least as much as a plane but often much much more
B) it's slower than driving!
C) the stops are so limited you basically have to follow major coastal cities or you're SOL
Literally if any of these three things were changed I would take weekend trips all the time
mah tax dollars ain't gunna buy some socialist transport system!
The one time I took a train for a mid range distance, it cost like $250. That being said, I didn't have to drive through NYC traffic, deal with tolls, or deal with parking and had a lot of room to myself.
But it was also slow and $250 from Philly to NYC? Buhhhhh probably wouldn't again lol
Because they are in better part of the world(EU)
*cries in Canadian
No, wait. This is actually not a bad idea.
Look closely. First of all there's a rigid barrier between the lower and upper seat. That means that fart gasses won't get through, unlike current seats where farts just spread everywhere around a person, so only the upper seats will be affected.
Second, the lady has her feet up, meaning she has enough leg room to do so. This is a big advantage because you can kick your feet up on your underseat baggage while you sleep or stretch your legs. It's much better than the current layout where you can barely move at all.
No offense, but I think anyone with a negative opinion of this layout is wrong.
The lady isn't choosing to "have her feet up," she is essentially sitting on the floor and forced into the L shape by the rigid structure around her. There's still incredibly little range of motion just like a regular seat, except now with the added danger of a much more difficult emergency evacuation, especially for people with limited mobility.
And for people with blood clots! Locking your knees prevents blood flow and can get those clots forming faster.
Since locking your knees while standing makes you pass out, I wonder if locking your knees while seated also makes you pass out.
I don't think so. But it's hard to tell from this perspective.
Also, I'm imagining that there isn't a wall right in front of her face, as this angle suggests. But rather, there is a bit of a cavity tucked up under the top seat. Oh, yeah... found an image. It does still look a little claustrophobic in there.
Yea that dude looks thin and average height and uncomfortable. I'm 230 6ft with some muscle. I'm gonna feel like a sardine.
Well, don't you already?
Who doesn't?
You can get one of the top seats, and I'll slither down into the bottom seats.
Oh cool! It's actually not so bad. I wouldn't mind.
Hitting that board in a crash is probably going to be worse than hitting the back of a single chair.
My biggest problem with the space is that if I had to sit with my legs out like that, I'd eventually cramp up and inevitably bang my knees on the chair above.
I suspect the angle might make the space look smaller too, it's possible that the wall actually extends a bit out without being solid inside
She's also fully reclined her seat. So maybe if her seat was upright it would be easier for people to get in and out.
An issue with this is getting up mid flight
How so? You just push the seat back and get out, it'll be about as much of an issue as a normal (very cramped) seat.
I was thinking for the window seat
This is marketing meaning if this ever actually came to market (and it won't) they would immediately begin adjusting it to reclaim even more room causing cramping with each new redesign. People are very easily conditioned so years after this became a thing and multiple redesigns later people would only just be beginning to realize it has already happened and even then nothing would change because the general public won't do anything while a select few will complain and make no impact.
Lalala, don't mind me, I'll just leave this here...
People see these stupid concepts and forget that air travel is pretty strictly regulated.
There's really not much room to squeeze more seats in and also appease regulators.
Which doesn't mean it won't get worse, they'll capture the regulating agencies and then it'll get worse.
There is also NO REGULATION that demands airlines actually provide a chair. If they can find something that passes the rules that do exist, that fits more people because it isn't a chair, and that they think people will suffer through, they will do it.
My man, you're required to be seated and buckled during takeoff and landing.
You may be thinking of minimum seat size requirements, which has been on ongoing battle for at least the last 5 years, and it seems the FAA isn't required to come up with minimum safe dimensions of a seat, so long as the aircraft can be evacuated in 90 seconds or fewer.
There are some carve outs for very specific cases but right now, and for the foreseeable future, airlines must have seats.
Yeah, I'm reminded of that rollercoaster style semi-dangling legs seat. It gets everyone more vertical, so they can fit more rows in.
Please point to a 14 cfr reg that states that being buckled must be in a seat. 14 CFR 121.311 outlines 121 carriers and seat, harnesses, etc.
Please pay special attention to the fact that every time a place to sit is mentioned it says SEAT OR BERTH. There is no requirement for it to be a seat.
Of particular note is that the FAA says "an approved seat or berth." There has not been an explicit exclusion of "non seats". Meaning that any airline can configure a cabin as they see fit and if they can convince the FAA that it's okay, then it can be implemented.
The rules refer to "approved seats or berths" as seats as the language progresses and they start to detail exclusions and exceptions, but again, this does not exclude something that conventionally isn't a chair from being labeled as an approved "seat"
There is an example, notice how they still refer to them as seats. My point isn't that it will or won't happen. My point is that the language doesn't outlaw it as currently written. And you're wrong for trying to say otherwise.
As a taller person, if this gives me sufficient legroom and a seat that actually distributes the weight over my whole thighs such that I can sit somewhat comfortable, this seems like a major upgrade to me.
In the case of any serious accident or emergency you're very likely to lose both your legs.
They shouldn't be too hard to find though
It's a flying soda can; in the event of a serious accident you're likely to lose your head.
You're even more likely to die.
Totally agree. Having recently done 13 hours in economy, the fact my knees are constantly wedged against something and I can't straighten out is the biggest discomfort. I don't speak Italian so I don't need acres of room to swing my arms around, lift the person in front up and give me leg room instead!
Transatlantic human cattle
The sadness really hits when you see this was last year, and not 1991 where the concept should have stayed.
We're getting dangerously close to how they packed the slaves in the cargo holds of ships for transport across the ocean.
Um... no? A voluntary half-day voyage in comfortable seats is not even nearly comparable to the inhuman horrors experienced on slave ships. There is absolutely nothing dangerous about this.
Um⦠no? A voluntary half-day voyage in comfortable seats is not even nearly comparable to the inhuman horrors experienced on slave ships.
Way to overthink it, damn. That was meant as a comedic anecdote, not as a literal comparison.
Im a huge fan of the 5th element strat. Slide me into a pod and render me unconcious with gas. It solves so many problems - entertaing self in flight, listening to the bodily functions of strangers, crying babies. Airlines would save millions on meals not served and stewards not serving them. It even solves security concerns, terrorists cant hijack a plane when they are unconcious and locked in a pod.
And if the worst happens, and the plane has a case of engine-rich-exhaust and is hurtling down into the freezing southern ocean, I really dont wanna know about it. Just let Posiden take me in my sleep.
Frankly, I'm more surprised to see that the same people who have trouble spelling "rogue" and "tongue" also can't spell "lounge"... or use auto spellcheck
On the chaise longue, On the chaise longue, On the chaise longue, all day long.
I heard this song for the first time yesterday, that's so weird.
Ah good. The hivemind is functioning as intended.
I imagine that would make emergency deplaning take a lot longer to the point lives could be lost if there were a fire.
Yall need to stop posting these, they are never going to happen. Neither these, nor the partially standing ones.
The fact that these concepts are even made to begin with is the concerning part. Someone out there is on board.
Never say never!
Chaise longue, french for claustrophobia
This is really, REALLY stupid
We need to go back to pre-9/11 plane organization.
This is just wrong.
Also the fact that planes these days are slower and travel times longer than 30 or 40 years ago. This makes the above seating arrangement even worse for long distance flights.
The planes are more fuel efficient at certain speeds slower than their max speed. It's not just cost savings for the airlines, but savings for the earth.
Those three passengers are sure to have some great bonding time down there in that claustrophobic space π€¦ββοΈ
Please, seat companies, stop giving the airlines ideas!
You don't want to blindly stick your feet into that dark underseat compartment.
Id prefer to lay down.
If I could fly in a coffin in the baggage section Iβd be so much more comfortable.
How big is this cabin? I can't stand up in current seats now, where in the world are these going to fit? Where do carry-ons go?
Passengers and their god damn legs always being in the way.
"If you didn't want the mandatory double amputation you should've upgraded to comfort plus."
pretty sure that's just called steerage
steerage, stowage, storage I swear you're just trying to mess with us at this point
Based on the angle, it looks like the person on the bottom could end up having some repeatedly farting in their faceβ¦
Extra discount fare if you eat ass.
Honestly, you hook me up with an HMD, mouse, and keyboard and i would be down for it.
I'm 6'6". My ass would be halfway up the seat.
Diabolical!
The whole notion defeats the point.
The extra passengers / profit will be negated by the larger fuselage and drag.
The 787 and 380 would like a word. Fuckin' Dreamliner is already wider than most houses, with more headroom.
Now make them both bigger to allow for double stacking.
This was designed for a concept aircraft but the creator says it can be modified to fit into a modern widebody.
Not that it matters. Shit like this will never see the light of day owing to egress issues.
This honestly looks like a win win situation to me
This actually looks like in a normal position the seat would be further back and give you a normal amount of face room. Looks like itβs on its way down to a lying position.
Idk why everyone acts like this would be some sort of travesty. If higher seating capacity through innovative cabine layouts bring down cost and carbon emissions per passenger, I'm all for it. I'm not flying for the experience but to get to my destination. If you all care so much about spacious seating, just book business class.
You don't design for the flight; you design for the evacuation. We learned that the hard way decades ago. This looks like it forgot all those lessons paid for by people's lives.
Adding onto this, the cabin design in OPβs post looks like it would 100% break your legs if the plane were to ever crash. It would absolutely suck to be in a plane crash and have your legs broken.
Evacuate Deez nutz
Then just add additional emergency exits to the plane. Except for a higher total number of passengers I don't see how this layout would significantly slow down evacuation otherwise. Though I'm by no means an expert.
People's legs being in that position would negate what is considered a safe evacuation. Modern regulations stipulate that you have 90 seconds to get everyone off the plane safely with 50% of the emergency exits blocked. That's why you're required to be seated completely upright with your feet on the floor during takeoff and landing. So you can stand up immediately if anything goes wrong and you need to evacuate.
This accident is one of the reasons why that rule exists. We forget these things:
"It was then, just 90 seconds after the plane came to a stop, that the entire passenger cabin exploded in flame. An unstoppable wall of fire swept forward from the back of the plane, consuming everything in its path, painting every window in brilliant orange. Firefighters tried to fight it, but there was nothing they could do. Captain Cameron, who jumped from the window just seconds before the explosion, would be the last to leave the plane alive."
Your legs would obviously not be in that position during takeoff and landing. This picture was clearly taken with the seat reclined to show the relatively comfortable seating position during the flight. If you search for any other pictures that are not cropped like this one, you can see that there's still some space below the seat to put your feet down.
And whenever I disembark from a plane not once have I felt like getting out of my seat is the limiting factor for why it takes so long. The bottlenecks are always the limited number of exits and aisles that every passenger has to squeeze through.
Edit: actually I found a 3d render of the proposed cabine layout here it looks tight but otherwise pretty standard if you ask me, except for the two levels of course.
"would not be in that position"?!? What version of reality are you smoking where these seats are gonna freaking move to vertical?
Edit: on further inspection, you're gonna go full ATM if you sit upright. You're so low to the floor to accommodate the upper decker that your knees would be in your chest cavity if they were on the floor. Frack every bit of this idea in the neck, sideways, with a screwdriver.
Have you ever been in an airliner? "upright an locked in their vertical positions" - ever heard that? Putting goddamned laz-e-boys in the middle of an airliner is gonna lead to corpses in the event of a catestrophoc accident. (not that it would stop the airline industry, if it could)
I found a 3d render of the proposed cabine layout here it looks tight but otherwise pretty standard if you ask me, except for the two levels of course.
The moment of inertia on that upper deck is going to snap those seats like a twig. While I'm sure there's airline execs foaming at the mouth and lobbyists pushing wheelbarrows of money, I'll drive before I get in one of those.
Also, more passengers plus less overhead bin storage means less cargo hold capacity, meaning air cargo (a valuable income stream, particularly on transcontinental or transoceanic flights, where the widebodies would be most used) would be cut back by more checked bags. And more discontent by pax that now have to pay for checked bag fees.
This looks like a good way to eliminate all my carbon emissions from flying because thereβs no way Iβll get on a plane like this.
One word: Claustrophobia
Deep vein thrombosis and lack of efficient evacuation routes say hello
I'm not even particularly claustrophobic, and I am also very aware that this is unlikely to ever pass FAA inspection, and yet I still inevitably start breathing heavier every time I see this photo. It's just so terrifying.
This seems incompatible with a pretty high proportion of Americans.
Y'all getting kinda thicc too, no offense.
It's funny because you don't know which country he's from but it still applies anyway because everyone is getting fatter
Relevant username
Tremendously incompatible, if 1/10 of what is portraid on movies is true.
Extra cushioning for crashes, just have to wear a xxxl diaper.
With your face right at prime fart receiving level. Wtf.
Even for the people who would get off on that, their joy would turn to frustration when the flight attendant asked them to stop masturbating.
This guy right here officer
The Pink Eye Express.
Sounds like a real gas, man.
Pretty soon they're just going to roofie people and pack them into planes like sardines.
Multipass!
Honestly it's like teleporting then so I'm on board.
They could just tip the nose of the plane 90 degrees in the air and then have a slide or funnel that dumps you into the fuselage. You'll just want to be sure to buy first-class tickets so that you'll be at the top of the pile.
Get a tamper to pack em in a little
A la Fifth Element.
Why did they say if like it was a bad thing? I want this to be a thing.
I think they should just have rows of bunk beds. It's much easier to stack something flat than people with their awkward bends at the hips and knees.
unsurprisingly the ship and train industry figured this shit out like literally a century ago
The airlines can maximize that idea as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks\_(1781\_ship)#/media/File:Slaveshipposter.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_(1781_ship)#/media/File:Slaveshipposter.jpg
God, I would love that. I can't sleep sitting up, even when I'm really tired. Long plane rides are torture.
Window seat dude needs to take a piss, watch the fun ...
Also, why the fuck is she smiling?!
I think these only go down the center based on the photo.
She's smiling because she's being paid to smile.
Acting!
One day they'll invent super-economy class where you just get strapped to the wings and released over your destination. Parachutes will cost extra.
At least there'd finally be room.
I think whoever thought of this concept should die
Eh. Fewer passengers per plane is worse for the environment, and lying down is great for people with back problems. I can see the pluses.
Here is a 3d render of the proposed cabin layout seen in this image.
Where are the overhead baggage bins? No carry-on bags? If they go in the hold, how do you make it bigger?
This design is similar but not the same as OG post. Although still shitty, its quite an improvement over the orgional.
Those steps DEFINITELY aren't a safety hazard.
The newer version from the link looks less bad than this picture, but still dystopian as fuck. We need to make airline travel cheaper somehow rather than having the airline industry come up with their own ideas to try and pack people in like cattle.
Cheaper? What kinda crack are you smoking? Shit is destroying the planet, it needs to be a LOT more expensive.
what kind of crack are YOU smoking? So practically "banning" poor people for traveling anywhere further than 500km than their hometown is the solution? And allow rich people go on as usual?
The not-wealthy will be the only ones affected by this. Business people were traveling since the birth of the aviation and will continue travelling. This will be just an increased cost in their cost planning.
So if you're rich you're allowed to destroy the planet. If you're poor stay at home, the planet is in danger.
Uh, you know, it is possible to care about two things at once. Wanting airline travel to be cheaper/more comfortable and also less environmentally unfriendly are not mutually exclusive positions.
As others have pointed out, making it more expensive isn't going to get rid of air travel, it'll just be reserved for the ultra-wealthy who will not give a damn either way.
We could subsidize biofuels. Just spitballing.
I agree, but it's mostly the Uber wealthy, not regular travelers. It's bad, but it's not that bad. Using a whole plane to carry one or two people is horrible though.
You get points for being an environmentalist but lose points for accusing any differing opinion of being the result of drug use. That cliche is often used on autistic people to attack them for thinking differently. You should try making your point without cliches.
I don't think he meant that literally.
Yeah, that's usually how people use cliches. They hear something and think it sounds quippy in a rhetorical sense, even if it's not what they mean. It's a lazy way of participating in a conversation without actually putting forward any ideas of your own. It's the death of sincerity.
What I'm reading is you just fail to understand anything that isn't literal.
This extra passenger density would make it cheaper per person, right? More fuel efficient, too.
Looking over my original post, perhaps my phrasing wasn't clear. Yes, this is one way to decrease costs, but it comes at the expense of comfort. Airline companies are no stranger to this process, and have been rolling out new methods of packing as many passengers onto a plane as physically possible since the very first commercial airplanes took flight.
Awkward and regressive ideas like this, where the airlines are contemplating stacking people in uncomfortable looking double-decker seating to save precious inches of space are only coming out now because no significant strides have been made in making air travel less expensive to operate as a whole. It is always going to be easier to shave off a few inches of legroom and pack in another row of seating in the next generation of jet airliner than it is to invent a new type of jet fuel that is cheaper and burns cleaner without sacrificing performance, or developing a new more efficient fuselage that can fly just as far as a conventional plane while carrying less fuel, etc.
It would be nice to see air travel improve for a change, rather than continue to get worse and worse over time out of necessity.
imagine this plane crashing.
Just like all plane crashes, everyone would die.
Not sure if you're just joking, but plenty of people survive plane crashes. Most crashes aren't just a plane falling out of the sky at full speed. Survival rates are around 95%.
Generally speaking, plane crashes are like train crashes. Either most everyone survives, or most everyone dies pretty quickly, with very little in between.
Imagine this plane with a fire on board before takeoff and now the unfit overweight masses have to evacuate.
Imagine a new meaning to the phrase "upper decker".
at that point just give me general anaesthesia and put me in an airline shipping coffin so at least i don't have to be conscious for the horror show
Someone somewhere just pulled out some graph paper and is sketching a concept.
12 hour flight. The fail-safes fail. Something goes wrong with the anesthesia and you're awake for the entire thing
I woke up in the middle of my wisdom teeth surgery so I of all people oughtta know better lol
Still better hab Ryanair!
I fly often for work, stay up the whole night before and cannabis. Flying is easy now.
As someone who doesn't have claustrophobia, I feel claustrophobic just looking at this. Then again, I've never been on a plane before, and for all I know this might be better :/
I had very bad claustrophobia the time I got rolled in a carpet with only my head sticking out or the time I got closed in a trunk. Flew around 12 times on airplanes and they are mostly just uncomfortable and annoying. Maybe I grew out of it π€·
Are you a cartoon or something?
Huh?
Getting locked in a trunk and rolled up into a carpet with your head sticking out just sounds like someone Wile e coyote would count as normal life experiences. Bonus points if you hopped away off screen after getting rolled in the carpet.
I got rolled into our floor rug as a kid, we were messing around and I thought it would be funny. It was not and a panic attack was had.
Who keeps abducting you?!
I think theres just so much shit going on in an airplane that the brain short circuits and doesnt think about the fact that you are in a disturbingly thin walled, air sealed aluminium can hurtling through the sky at 800+kph with a hundred other people, most of whom dont have the common sense the gods gave a common rock, and are riddled with disease that you are no doubt being exposed to due to being crammed in like sardines.
I agree it sucks but most of the time I am just hoping that the plane doesn't crash, and I am a pretty anxious person, other than that my headphones are in and I'm either listening to music or watching a something and looking out the window :p
The leg room is better but scooting into the window seat will be slightly harder. Hard telling if you can put your feet down in this set up though.
The leg room is different, but it isn't better. There's about the same amount of usable space. I'd prefer the classic chair setup I think.
Just looks way too low clearance. Can't put up your knees, can't put one leg over the other, can't lay on the side. Who can keep their legs straight like this for 10h. If it had like double the clearance I'd love this.
Alternatively, have it totally flat under some chairs maybe? Have the option for a bed or a chair basically.
That doesn't actually look to bad considering what we have today
Right at fart smelling level
In a sealed pressurised container I'd assume fart smelling was mandatory.
She's smiling, so you know it's all okay
don't think of the farts don't think of the farts don't think of the farts don't think of the farts don't think of the farts
These people smile like they've never rode in an airplane with more than 3 people
Why does she look so happy?
Paid model or executive. They're trying to sell the concept.
Yeah, I would assume so. It was kind of a rhetorical question - this looks very much staged.
she has a secret fetish for strangers powering farts directly into her face while being confined so tightly as to feel buried alive.
She's able to stretch her legs? Sure, she is most likely not particularly tall, but the only saving grace I can see for a setup like this would be more space to stretch your legs out.
Ah, who am I kidding, they would still bunch it impossibly close..
Better be because her ticket from Seoul to San Francisco was just $35
She eats ass.
"why do people prefer trains??"
Honestly I wish that was the case in the US.
For most people, trains are not a alternative.
Often trains cost more. Many train stations are messes and share space with busses.
I desperately want to take a train anywhere. BUT
A) It always costs at least as much as a plane but often much much more
B) it's slower than driving!
C) the stops are so limited you basically have to follow major coastal cities or you're SOL
Literally if any of these three things were changed I would take weekend trips all the time
mah tax dollars ain't gunna buy some socialist transport system!
The one time I took a train for a mid range distance, it cost like $250. That being said, I didn't have to drive through NYC traffic, deal with tolls, or deal with parking and had a lot of room to myself.
But it was also slow and $250 from Philly to NYC? Buhhhhh probably wouldn't again lol
Because they are in better part of the world(EU)
*cries in Canadian
No, wait. This is actually not a bad idea.
Look closely. First of all there's a rigid barrier between the lower and upper seat. That means that fart gasses won't get through, unlike current seats where farts just spread everywhere around a person, so only the upper seats will be affected.
Second, the lady has her feet up, meaning she has enough leg room to do so. This is a big advantage because you can kick your feet up on your underseat baggage while you sleep or stretch your legs. It's much better than the current layout where you can barely move at all.
No offense, but I think anyone with a negative opinion of this layout is wrong.
The lady isn't choosing to "have her feet up," she is essentially sitting on the floor and forced into the L shape by the rigid structure around her. There's still incredibly little range of motion just like a regular seat, except now with the added danger of a much more difficult emergency evacuation, especially for people with limited mobility.
And for people with blood clots! Locking your knees prevents blood flow and can get those clots forming faster.
Since locking your knees while standing makes you pass out, I wonder if locking your knees while seated also makes you pass out.
I don't think so. But it's hard to tell from this perspective.
If only there were ways to find out.
Amazing! Thank you!
She actually is not.
Also, I'm imagining that there isn't a wall right in front of her face, as this angle suggests. But rather, there is a bit of a cavity tucked up under the top seat. Oh, yeah... found an image. It does still look a little claustrophobic in there.
Yea that dude looks thin and average height and uncomfortable. I'm 230 6ft with some muscle. I'm gonna feel like a sardine.
Well, don't you already?
Who doesn't?
You can get one of the top seats, and I'll slither down into the bottom seats.
Oh cool! It's actually not so bad. I wouldn't mind.
Hitting that board in a crash is probably going to be worse than hitting the back of a single chair.
My biggest problem with the space is that if I had to sit with my legs out like that, I'd eventually cramp up and inevitably bang my knees on the chair above.
I suspect the angle might make the space look smaller too, it's possible that the wall actually extends a bit out without being solid inside
She's also fully reclined her seat. So maybe if her seat was upright it would be easier for people to get in and out.
An issue with this is getting up mid flight
How so? You just push the seat back and get out, it'll be about as much of an issue as a normal (very cramped) seat.
I was thinking for the window seat
This is marketing meaning if this ever actually came to market (and it won't) they would immediately begin adjusting it to reclaim even more room causing cramping with each new redesign. People are very easily conditioned so years after this became a thing and multiple redesigns later people would only just be beginning to realize it has already happened and even then nothing would change because the general public won't do anything while a select few will complain and make no impact.
Lalala, don't mind me, I'll just leave this here...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/feb/28/ryanair-standing-only-plane-tickets-regulator
People see these stupid concepts and forget that air travel is pretty strictly regulated.
There's really not much room to squeeze more seats in and also appease regulators.
Which doesn't mean it won't get worse, they'll capture the regulating agencies and then it'll get worse.
There is also NO REGULATION that demands airlines actually provide a chair. If they can find something that passes the rules that do exist, that fits more people because it isn't a chair, and that they think people will suffer through, they will do it.
My man, you're required to be seated and buckled during takeoff and landing.
You may be thinking of minimum seat size requirements, which has been on ongoing battle for at least the last 5 years, and it seems the FAA isn't required to come up with minimum safe dimensions of a seat, so long as the aircraft can be evacuated in 90 seconds or fewer.
There are some carve outs for very specific cases but right now, and for the foreseeable future, airlines must have seats.
Yeah, I'm reminded of that rollercoaster style semi-dangling legs seat. It gets everyone more vertical, so they can fit more rows in.
Please point to a 14 cfr reg that states that being buckled must be in a seat. 14 CFR 121.311 outlines 121 carriers and seat, harnesses, etc.
Please pay special attention to the fact that every time a place to sit is mentioned it says SEAT OR BERTH. There is no requirement for it to be a seat.
Of particular note is that the FAA says "an approved seat or berth." There has not been an explicit exclusion of "non seats". Meaning that any airline can configure a cabin as they see fit and if they can convince the FAA that it's okay, then it can be implemented.
The rules refer to "approved seats or berths" as seats as the language progresses and they start to detail exclusions and exceptions, but again, this does not exclude something that conventionally isn't a chair from being labeled as an approved "seat"
https://www.insider.com/skyrider-standing-airplane-seats-claims-makes-flights-cheaper-2018-4
There is an example, notice how they still refer to them as seats. My point isn't that it will or won't happen. My point is that the language doesn't outlaw it as currently written. And you're wrong for trying to say otherwise.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/121.311
Berths are for laying down.
But 91.107(a)(3) is the one you're looking for.
The fuck I am, part 91 isn't a common carrier
There are laws regulating how to transport pigs and cows to the slaughterhouse. They have more space than the passengers on this plane.
Can they guarantee it won't collapse and break my legs?
I would hope that the people designing airplanes can accommodate the weight of a person
You mean the accountants? They get final say on everything these days
It depends on who's sitting in the upper seats.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/06/why-youll-never-fly-in-an-airplane-with-those-double-decker-seats/
As a taller person, if this gives me sufficient legroom and a seat that actually distributes the weight over my whole thighs such that I can sit somewhat comfortable, this seems like a major upgrade to me.
In the case of any serious accident or emergency you're very likely to lose both your legs.
They shouldn't be too hard to find though
It's a flying soda can; in the event of a serious accident you're likely to lose your head.
You're even more likely to die.
Totally agree. Having recently done 13 hours in economy, the fact my knees are constantly wedged against something and I can't straighten out is the biggest discomfort. I don't speak Italian so I don't need acres of room to swing my arms around, lift the person in front up and give me leg room instead!
Transatlantic human cattle
The sadness really hits when you see this was last year, and not 1991 where the concept should have stayed.
We're getting dangerously close to how they packed the slaves in the cargo holds of ships for transport across the ocean.
Um... no? A voluntary half-day voyage in comfortable seats is not even nearly comparable to the inhuman horrors experienced on slave ships. There is absolutely nothing dangerous about this.
Way to overthink it, damn. That was meant as a comedic anecdote, not as a literal comparison.
Im a huge fan of the 5th element strat. Slide me into a pod and render me unconcious with gas. It solves so many problems - entertaing self in flight, listening to the bodily functions of strangers, crying babies. Airlines would save millions on meals not served and stewards not serving them. It even solves security concerns, terrorists cant hijack a plane when they are unconcious and locked in a pod.
And if the worst happens, and the plane has a case of engine-rich-exhaust and is hurtling down into the freezing southern ocean, I really dont wanna know about it. Just let Posiden take me in my sleep.
Frankly, I'm more surprised to see that the same people who have trouble spelling "rogue" and "tongue" also can't spell "lounge"... or use auto spellcheck
On the chaise longue, On the chaise longue, On the chaise longue, all day long.
I heard this song for the first time yesterday, that's so weird.
Ah good. The hivemind is functioning as intended.
I imagine that would make emergency deplaning take a lot longer to the point lives could be lost if there were a fire.
Yall need to stop posting these, they are never going to happen. Neither these, nor the partially standing ones.
The fact that these concepts are even made to begin with is the concerning part. Someone out there is on board.
Never say never!
Chaise longue, french for claustrophobia
This is really, REALLY stupid
We need to go back to pre-9/11 plane organization.
This is just wrong.
Also the fact that planes these days are slower and travel times longer than 30 or 40 years ago. This makes the above seating arrangement even worse for long distance flights.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/travel/6247384/flights-longer-now-plane-slower/
The planes are more fuel efficient at certain speeds slower than their max speed. It's not just cost savings for the airlines, but savings for the earth.
Those three passengers are sure to have some great bonding time down there in that claustrophobic space π€¦ββοΈ
Please, seat companies, stop giving the airlines ideas!
You don't want to blindly stick your feet into that dark underseat compartment.
Id prefer to lay down.
If I could fly in a coffin in the baggage section Iβd be so much more comfortable.
How big is this cabin? I can't stand up in current seats now, where in the world are these going to fit? Where do carry-ons go?
Passengers and their god damn legs always being in the way.
"If you didn't want the mandatory double amputation you should've upgraded to comfort plus."
pretty sure that's just called steerage
steerage, stowage, storage I swear you're just trying to mess with us at this point
Based on the angle, it looks like the person on the bottom could end up having some repeatedly farting in their faceβ¦
Extra discount fare if you eat ass.
Honestly, you hook me up with an HMD, mouse, and keyboard and i would be down for it.
I'm 6'6". My ass would be halfway up the seat.
Diabolical!
The whole notion defeats the point. The extra passengers / profit will be negated by the larger fuselage and drag.
The 787 and 380 would like a word. Fuckin' Dreamliner is already wider than most houses, with more headroom.
Now make them both bigger to allow for double stacking.
This was designed for a concept aircraft but the creator says it can be modified to fit into a modern widebody.
Not that it matters. Shit like this will never see the light of day owing to egress issues.
This honestly looks like a win win situation to me
This actually looks like in a normal position the seat would be further back and give you a normal amount of face room. Looks like itβs on its way down to a lying position.
Idk why everyone acts like this would be some sort of travesty. If higher seating capacity through innovative cabine layouts bring down cost and carbon emissions per passenger, I'm all for it. I'm not flying for the experience but to get to my destination. If you all care so much about spacious seating, just book business class.
You don't design for the flight; you design for the evacuation. We learned that the hard way decades ago. This looks like it forgot all those lessons paid for by people's lives.
Adding onto this, the cabin design in OPβs post looks like it would 100% break your legs if the plane were to ever crash. It would absolutely suck to be in a plane crash and have your legs broken.
Evacuate Deez nutz
Then just add additional emergency exits to the plane. Except for a higher total number of passengers I don't see how this layout would significantly slow down evacuation otherwise. Though I'm by no means an expert.
People's legs being in that position would negate what is considered a safe evacuation. Modern regulations stipulate that you have 90 seconds to get everyone off the plane safely with 50% of the emergency exits blocked. That's why you're required to be seated completely upright with your feet on the floor during takeoff and landing. So you can stand up immediately if anything goes wrong and you need to evacuate.
This accident is one of the reasons why that rule exists. We forget these things:
"It was then, just 90 seconds after the plane came to a stop, that the entire passenger cabin exploded in flame. An unstoppable wall of fire swept forward from the back of the plane, consuming everything in its path, painting every window in brilliant orange. Firefighters tried to fight it, but there was nothing they could do. Captain Cameron, who jumped from the window just seconds before the explosion, would be the last to leave the plane alive."
https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/a-song-of-smoke-and-fire-the-tragedy-of-air-canada-flight-797-7ea7923e76d8
Your legs would obviously not be in that position during takeoff and landing. This picture was clearly taken with the seat reclined to show the relatively comfortable seating position during the flight. If you search for any other pictures that are not cropped like this one, you can see that there's still some space below the seat to put your feet down.
And whenever I disembark from a plane not once have I felt like getting out of my seat is the limiting factor for why it takes so long. The bottlenecks are always the limited number of exits and aisles that every passenger has to squeeze through.
Edit: actually I found a 3d render of the proposed cabine layout here it looks tight but otherwise pretty standard if you ask me, except for the two levels of course.
"would not be in that position"?!? What version of reality are you smoking where these seats are gonna freaking move to vertical?
Edit: on further inspection, you're gonna go full ATM if you sit upright. You're so low to the floor to accommodate the upper decker that your knees would be in your chest cavity if they were on the floor. Frack every bit of this idea in the neck, sideways, with a screwdriver.
Have you ever been in an airliner? "upright an locked in their vertical positions" - ever heard that? Putting goddamned laz-e-boys in the middle of an airliner is gonna lead to corpses in the event of a catestrophoc accident. (not that it would stop the airline industry, if it could)
I found a 3d render of the proposed cabine layout here it looks tight but otherwise pretty standard if you ask me, except for the two levels of course.
The moment of inertia on that upper deck is going to snap those seats like a twig. While I'm sure there's airline execs foaming at the mouth and lobbyists pushing wheelbarrows of money, I'll drive before I get in one of those.
Also, more passengers plus less overhead bin storage means less cargo hold capacity, meaning air cargo (a valuable income stream, particularly on transcontinental or transoceanic flights, where the widebodies would be most used) would be cut back by more checked bags. And more discontent by pax that now have to pay for checked bag fees.
I dunno, I just don't see the benefits.
Clearly
This looks like a good way to eliminate all my carbon emissions from flying because thereβs no way Iβll get on a plane like this.
One word: Claustrophobia
Deep vein thrombosis and lack of efficient evacuation routes say hello
I'm not even particularly claustrophobic, and I am also very aware that this is unlikely to ever pass FAA inspection, and yet I still inevitably start breathing heavier every time I see this photo. It's just so terrifying.