Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New airplane seat design to make it easier to sleep in economy

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 480 posts

Re: New airplane seat design to make it easier to sleep in economy

#411

Post by ghostbrainalpha »

rpiguy wrote: post #395
crazygringo wrote: post #388

Wow, I can’t believe how dismissive most of the comments here are. The idea of adding folding wings to existing seat dimensions could be a huge, huge improvement for sleeping on flights. No, it’s not changing or solving anything else. Yes the model is tiny. No this isn’t solving existing recline issues if you’re 6’5”. If you have incredibly broad shoulders then you might not be able to use the wings but you can still…

Let's say this adds 10 pounds to each seat times 150-400 seats. No way the airlines would go for it they are trying to cut weight from the planes to scrape every ounce of fuel economy out of the airframe. It is a non-starter. Airlines also have zero incentive to increase passenger comfort because most airlines operate near capacity (all flights full/overbooked) on most routes because of deregulation. You have no alte…

There are a bunch of reasons this prototype will fail, but weight doesn't seem like the top of the list.

"The seat prototype on show at the launch was a carbon fiber, lightweight design -- but the designer insists the wings could be fitted to most existing seats, whatever their material."

This article has raises a number of issues. The biggest being increase of turnaround time from the complexity of cleaning, and also problem with the food service tray when wings are deployed.

https://thedesignair.net/2019/12/07/interspace-the-new-seat-...

I think if these ever make it into planes it will probably be in first class... even though there is little need for it there. Or perhaps in economy if each seat only gets a single wing.

Re: New airplane seat design to make it easier to sleep in economy

#412

Post by jrockway »

chrisseaton wrote: post #291
jrockway wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On what airlines? The last time I flew economy in a 777 it was 2-5-2. I think more recently, 3-4-3 is common. On 787s, 3-3-3 seems like the standard. Not sure what Airbus is up to, but I'm guessing they're not selling many planes if their selling point is "higher fuel consumption for every economy passenger!"

767-300ER for example - United Airlines 80 which I use all the time to cross the Atlantic https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/United_Airlines/United_Air...

Ah, that makes sense. The 767s are on their way out (I guess United still uses them, though), so the days of 2-3-2 are nearing an end. 787s are all 3-3-3, I believe.

Re: New airplane seat design to make it easier to sleep in economy

#413

Post by menssen »

AJ007 wrote: post #398
rpiguy wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's say this adds 10 pounds to each seat times 150-400 seats. No way the airlines would go for it they are trying to cut weight from the planes to scrape every ounce of fuel economy out of the airframe. It is a non-starter. Airlines also have zero incentive to increase passenger comfort because most airlines operate near capacity (all flights full/overbooked) on most routes because of deregulation. You have no alte…

2009 was pretty good too. During the next major recession/depression the cut back on both business and vacation travelers will be significant. Which, I think is ok to advocate for given we are now in the longest expansion in US history.

It's okay... to advocate for a major economic recession to make flying more comfortable for those of us with somewhat recession-proof skills?

Re: New airplane seat design to make it easier to sleep in economy

#414

Post by masklinn »

brianbreslin wrote: post #372
organsnyder wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They show them in a 2-2 configuration, though. No airline uses that configuration in economy unless it's a small regional jet.

Some A350s like the NEOs run a 2-4-2 config. I think the A380s do too.

A380s are 2-4-2 on the upper deck economy, 3-4-3 on the lower deck.

And it looks like the original floor plans for the 350-900 were 2-4-2 but all the floor plans I can find from airlines and booking sites are 3-3-3 (the odd premium economy looks to be 2-4-2 but not regular economy).

Re: New airplane seat design to make it easier to sleep in economy

#415

Post by oh_sigh »

0xffff2 wrote: post #361
Pxtl wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you prove that you've disabled it? That it's not listening all the time and logging interesting sounds? I don't see a huge difference between a speaker that's designed to have an always-on mic listening for a code-word and we're just going to trust that it doesn't log anything unless it hears that codeword, and a phone that's designed to have the same, but has a software option to turn it off. Either way, we're t…

No, I can't prove that it's disabled, but that doesn't matter much. There are people out there who probably could and would be more than happy to publish their results if they did. More importantly, the difference is in intent. I don't intend to carry around a device that's always listening to me. Anyone with an Alexa device is intentionally inviting Amazon to listen to every word spoken in (part of) their home.

But the intent isn't there for Amazon to listen to everything you say - which is why hotword detection is done locally on Alexa and only then is an audio stream sent to their servers.

Re: New airplane seat design to make it easier to sleep in economy

#416

Post by jmilloy »

crazygringo wrote: post #404
Retric wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The images shows they reduce the width between a passenger and the arm rest when the majority of people are already cramped in these seats. Really, the model in that picture must be tiny to have that kind of room. So, this may help children sleep on aircraft but the design as shown is useless to me or most other tall adults.

Only when unfolded. Folded is the same. And the point is this is for sleeping leaning against a side. You wouldn’t be using the armrests then anyways. I’m 6’1” and this design looks like a huge improvement to me.

Where do they get stored when folded? Seems like I'm either losing space left to right when unfolded or losing space front to back when folded. Is that not correct?

Re: New airplane seat design to make it easier to sleep in economy

#417

Post by Xixi »

brianbreslin wrote: post #372
organsnyder wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They show them in a 2-2 configuration, though. No airline uses that configuration in economy unless it's a small regional jet.

Some A350s like the NEOs run a 2-4-2 config. I think the A380s do too.

A330s and A330NEOs are usually 2-4-2, though sometimes 3-3-3 in the cheapest LCCs. A350s are usually 3-3-3 in economy, with the cheapest LCCs going 3-4-3.

Re: New airplane seat design to make it easier to sleep in economy

#418

Post by Xixi »

masklinn wrote: post #414
brianbreslin wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some A350s like the NEOs run a 2-4-2 config. I think the A380s do too.

A380s are 2-4-2 on the upper deck economy, 3-4-3 on the lower deck. And it looks like the original floor plans for the 350-900 were 2-4-2 but all the floor plans I can find from airlines and booking sites are 3-3-3 (the odd premium economy looks to be 2-4-2 but not regular economy).

Air Caraibes goes 3-4-3 in its A350-900. That's very tight, as the A350 is really intended to be 3-3-3 in economy.

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Air_Caraibes/Air_Caraibes_...

Re: New airplane seat design to make it easier to sleep in economy

#419

Post by sonofhans »

rpiguy wrote: post #395
crazygringo wrote: post #388

Wow, I can’t believe how dismissive most of the comments here are. The idea of adding folding wings to existing seat dimensions could be a huge, huge improvement for sleeping on flights. No, it’s not changing or solving anything else. Yes the model is tiny. No this isn’t solving existing recline issues if you’re 6’5”. If you have incredibly broad shoulders then you might not be able to use the wings but you can still…

Let's say this adds 10 pounds to each seat times 150-400 seats. No way the airlines would go for it they are trying to cut weight from the planes to scrape every ounce of fuel economy out of the airframe. It is a non-starter. Airlines also have zero incentive to increase passenger comfort because most airlines operate near capacity (all flights full/overbooked) on most routes because of deregulation. You have no alte…

I hear what you mean about the empty planes. The best flying in my memory was in the 1970s. Everything was much more casual, less populated, and slower-paced. I remember eating freshly-fried eggs for breakfast on a 747, with metal silverware, in coach.

After 9/11 I remember a lot of fear. I got searched a lot. Everyone was tense. All connection points became more isolated (e.g., you can no longer walk your family to the gate). Most non-white men I know immediately started having a worse time flying after 9/11.

Now, there was also a smoking “section” in the back of the plane, and safety standards were nowhere near as robust as today, and everything was _way_ more expensive (relative to today).

Sleeping was easier since the seats were wider. If the post-deregulation business model requires packing people in like little cattle, some sort of veal-cubicle isolation wings seem reasonable.

Re: New airplane seat design to make it easier to sleep in economy

#420

Post by [deleted] »

jmilloy wrote: post #416
crazygringo wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only when unfolded. Folded is the same. And the point is this is for sleeping leaning against a side. You wouldn’t be using the armrests then anyways. I’m 6’1” and this design looks like a huge improvement to me.

Where do they get stored when folded? Seems like I'm either losing space left to right when unfolded or losing space front to back when folded. Is that not correct?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN