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

Letting slower passengers board airplane first is faster, study finds

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 512 posts

Re: Letting slower passengers board airplane first is faster, study finds

#161

Post by slowhand09 »

scott_s wrote: post #81

I'm also convinced that we exit the plane in the worst way possible. We basically do it row-by-row: as the people in front of them leave, people in a row get up, get their bags, start walking down the line, and this cascades up the plane. The problem is that there is very little parallelism: while people in the next row to leave are getting their bags, no one is exiting the plane. This is similar to a stall in a proc…

I think exiting should be "without bags in overheads - Now!" followed by front to rear general.

Re: Letting slower passengers board airplane first is faster, study finds

#162

Post by nradov »

eitland wrote: post #108
jaywalk wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was on a flight a year or two ago where, upon landing, a woman turned her phone on and received a call informing her that her brother had passed away. She was understandably quite distraught as we taxied to the gate, and the lead flight attendant even made an announcement asking everyone to please remain seated so that she could exit the plane first. Nobody listened.

I witnessed what seemed like a severe case of hypoglycemia in a passenger a few rows from me while stuck in a plane. The idea that someone might die because people cannot just listen is somewhat scary.

People did die on Aeroflot Flight 1492 because they didn't listen to instructions to leave their luggage behind.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/columnist/mcgee/2019/0...

Re: Letting slower passengers board airplane first is faster, study finds

#163

Post by reaperducer »

NoodleIncident wrote: post #100
reaperducer wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love CGP Grey's animations, and you can clearly tell this one involved a lot of work. The problem with his analyses is that they're frequently wrong because he look at problems in a very academic way and severely oversimplifies them. For example, his video about cars going through intersections makes perfect sense in a simulated world on a computer. But it falls down instantly in real life because it presumes that…

I was under the impression that his conclusions come from the same sort of papers we're discussing in the OP, and that the animation is just a demonstration of the effect. Some real-life issues should be addressed in future studies, for sure; for airplanes, it's probably important to model "families" that sit, board, and deplane together. But just listing the variables not accounted for in the study or video isn't sc…

You are correct. But his videos aren't presented as "this is possibly the best way, and it should be further investigated." They're presented as "This is the best way because I say so, even though I haven't done any testing but I'm a college professor and on YouTube so you should believe me."

Re: Letting slower passengers board airplane first is faster, study finds

#164

Post by TallGuyShort »

ftio wrote: post #93
scott_s wrote: post #81

I'm also convinced that we exit the plane in the worst way possible. We basically do it row-by-row: as the people in front of them leave, people in a row get up, get their bags, start walking down the line, and this cascades up the plane. The problem is that there is very little parallelism: while people in the next row to leave are getting their bags, no one is exiting the plane. This is similar to a stall in a proc…

This sounds like it might be faster, and I might like it for solo business trips, but getting on/off with my family is not optional for me. Assuming most multi-passenger groups feel similarly, and assuming solo business passengers represent only ~40% of the population, the impact of such a system (which would require substantially more passenger discipline/planning) would be pretty limited.

There's a documentary on Netflix, I think it's called "Speed" or something because it's about fast stuff, had an episode about doing Monte Carlo simulations of plane embark / disembark sequences that were optimal. They came up with optimal boarding processes but it required individual seat assignments which was a problem for kids (not to mention a ton of explaining). I forget if Southwest's semi-randomized approach was the next best, or boarding groups - I think it was randomized.

Re: Letting slower passengers board airplane first is faster, study finds

#166

Post by virtuous_signal »

whiddershins wrote: post #130

You know what I think is weird about all this discussion? Boarding and deplaning really don’t take that long, most of the time. Think 15 or 20 minutes max. It’s one of those things where it feels incredibly long and arduous. It feels interminable. But that has something (IMO) more to do with the psychological experience of flying. The actual time cost is fairly small, especially compared to so many other wastes of yo…

If you only look at the material side of what people are paying for: boarding a few minutes faster, deplaning a few minutes faster, comfier seats and better food, etc, then I completely agree that it doesn't make sense to pay an extra $1000 or so for a plane ticket. Here's what I think people do pay ridiculous amounts of money for: status, and ensuring they do not have to interact with normals. Air travel used to be a luxury activity in itself, but prices today mean that you are basically stepping onto a dirty sky bus (more so for some airlines than others). This is of course a generalization, but rich people do not take buses.

(This doesn't really apply to business travelers, as their companies need to pay for these upgrades to make the job travel less unattractive)

Re: Letting slower passengers board airplane first is faster, study finds

#167

Post by tardo99 »

scott_s wrote: post #81

I'm also convinced that we exit the plane in the worst way possible. We basically do it row-by-row: as the people in front of them leave, people in a row get up, get their bags, start walking down the line, and this cascades up the plane. The problem is that there is very little parallelism: while people in the next row to leave are getting their bags, no one is exiting the plane. This is similar to a stall in a proc…

What they should do is disallow anyone from opening the overhead bins until all the people who didn't insist on carrying on all their luggage exit.

Re: Letting slower passengers board airplane first is faster, study finds

#168

Post by tardo99 »

frankus wrote: post #141
scott_s wrote: post #81

I'm also convinced that we exit the plane in the worst way possible. We basically do it row-by-row: as the people in front of them leave, people in a row get up, get their bags, start walking down the line, and this cascades up the plane. The problem is that there is very little parallelism: while people in the next row to leave are getting their bags, no one is exiting the plane. This is similar to a stall in a proc…

Idle thought I had a while back: Let people who don't have anything in the overhead bins get off first.

Yes. To implement this you simply lock the overheads while in final descent, which makes sense anyway for safety reasons.

Re: Letting slower passengers board airplane first is faster, study finds

#169

Post by JoshTriplett »

matthewmacleod wrote: post #119
JoshTriplett wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Which they only do because free checked is going away. I pack everything in one piece of carry-on luggage, and I'd do that even if checked luggage were free (which it often is). It means I don't have to take extra time or wait in a line to check a bag at the source airport, I don't have to take time at baggage claim at the destination airport (just walk straight from the gate to ground transportation), and I don't…

However, it's also a massive pain in the arse having to fiddle around with removing various electronics and liquids while going through the security gate. I've actually started to opt for checking my bag whenever possible, even when I could get away with taking it into the cabin, and taking the minimum possible through security to avoid the too-frequent holdups. My experience is that this has added a maximum of about…

While I don't think it should be a thing (nobody should have to deal with such hassles), Global Entry / TSA-Pre removes most issues at the security checkpoint.

At many airports, checking a bag can add 20-30 minutes of waiting in line at the departure airport, leaving aside baggage claim time.

Re: Letting slower passengers board airplane first is faster, study finds

#170

Post by thrower123 »

scott_s wrote: post #81

I'm also convinced that we exit the plane in the worst way possible. We basically do it row-by-row: as the people in front of them leave, people in a row get up, get their bags, start walking down the line, and this cascades up the plane. The problem is that there is very little parallelism: while people in the next row to leave are getting their bags, no one is exiting the plane. This is similar to a stall in a proc…

The other common bottleneck with exiting is when you have to go back a few rows to get to where you had to stow your carry-on, because the plane was boarded from the front, and all of the overflow from the people who boarded ahead of you taking up the bins overhead of your seat.
Post reply on HN