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

A Better Way to Load a Plane

abcnews.go.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 60 posts

Re: A Better Way to Load a Plane

#51

Post by potatolicious »

whatusername wrote: post #41
aneesh wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the time taken for refueling, etc is the limiting factor. There are a couple sequences of events that need to happen (simultaneously) to get the plane ready to leave. Sequence 1: allow arriving passengers to deplane, then clean the plane, board new passengers Sequence 2: Refueling, other maintenance Sequence 3: load checked baggage The time taken to ready the plane is the maximum of the times for the 3…

Sequence 3: Unload checked baggage, then load the new baggage. Still - agreed - the unload/clean/board sequence in probably the longest one

But it really doesn't matter. Most flights will finished boarding well before the departure time, and many will arrive late as they always do. The plane can't leave until the departure time, so unless there's a direct cost benefit, why bother?

Re: A Better Way to Load a Plane

#52

Post by leelin »

Ah, but the algorithm only optimizes queue'ing up the plane cabin, when in fact we should optimize the entire queue + dequeue.

I only skimmed the PDF, but I think it overlooks one side benefit from loading a plane back-to-front as airlines do today: Your carry-on bag is very likely to end up near you or in front of you, even on a very packed flight.

The benefit is, when getting off the plane, which is always done front-to-back (and is probably optimal or close to it), everyone can grab their carry-on on their way down the aisle. If your carry-on ever ends up BEHIND your seat in the aisle, then generally you must wait until EVERYONE else gets off (it happened to me once, and that's when I suddenly realized why each flight has people who seem ready to go but must wait patiently for the entire aisle to clear).

With the proposed algorithm in the PDF, if you are in an odd-numbered aisle seat, you might just have to go all the way to the back to find spare carry-on space, which is a great disaster for the deplaning part. Why is there space in the back? Because when people book their seats, my personal observation shows they tend to pick the back last... I guess they don't want to be near the bathrooms.

Re: A Better Way to Load a Plane

#53

Post by markessien »

nostrademons wrote: post #47
markessien wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boarding passengers takes less than 20 minutes in most cases. Even with very fast airlines like easyjet, the plane sits longer the passengers board. Also, you know that airports queue planes, right? So a plane can't just hurry up to fill in passengers and take off. And in any case, why? Let's say you saved enough time to make an extra trip in a single day, then it would be worth it, but this is not going to save it.…

In 3 of the last 4 flights I've taken, boarding was the limiting factor. We left the gate within 5 minutes after the last person boarded, and were airborne shortly after without having to wait on the tarmac. On one of those flights, the plane didn't finish boarding until 10-15 minutes after it was scheduled to take off. Curiously, the one exception was a United red-eye back from SF to Boston. And I think they may've…

But when did you start boarding? When did the planes arrive? They usually make you start boarding about 20 minutes before they are allowed to take off, so people sit in the plane the minimum amount of time.

Re: A Better Way to Load a Plane

#54

Post by jmtulloss »

potatolicious wrote: post #51
whatusername wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sequence 3: Unload checked baggage, then load the new baggage. Still - agreed - the unload/clean/board sequence in probably the longest one

But it really doesn't matter. Most flights will finished boarding well before the departure time, and many will arrive late as they always do. The plane can't leave until the departure time, so unless there's a direct cost benefit, why bother?

They load so early because they have to guarantee that everything can happen in time. If you can reduce the time it takes to board, you can board passengers closer to the actual departure time. This allows you to squeeze flights closer together, which saves a ton of money.

Re: A Better Way to Load a Plane

#55

Post by jmtulloss »

aardvarkious wrote: post #44
russell wrote: post #3

"it turns out that the best method (one of several more or less equivalent methods) calls for passengers in even-numbered window seats near the back of the plane to board first", followed by even middle, even front, and odd rows int same order. I think I would be very annoyed if I arrived first and was the last to board, but the article says that its method is 6x faster than the current method.

Why? I intentionally get on the plane as late as I possibly can.

That doesn't work so well with a carry-on on a full flight.

Re: A Better Way to Load a Plane

#56

Post by gommm »

jrockway wrote: post #25
gaius wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Traveling Ryanair or other budget airlines, you get a "sequence number" which is the order in which you've checked in, theoretically this is also the order in which you board (seating is unassigned). But then you get there and they say "families traveling with children board first" and as this is an Irish airlines that's, umm, everyone but me. Which is understandable perhaps if people want to sit together, but hey, d…

The good news is that exit rows are desirable, and children and their keepers are prohibited (in the US, anyway) from sitting in them. So they can pre-board all they want, and not take away any of the good seats. (Of course, people are idiots. The one time I flew Southwest, I was on standby and boarded last -- the only remaining seat was an exit row. I was amazed.)

shush... please don't reveal this well guarded secret... I love always coming late in the plane and still getting the exit row. But if you start teaching other people that those are nice sits....

Re: A Better Way to Load a Plane

#58

Post by indiejade »

How about doubling the number of entrances/exits on a plane: have one on the front that boards the first half of the plane and one on the back that boards the rear half of the plane? I'm sure there would be some way to "thread" passengers once they all go past ticketcheck, perhaps with a re-engineered variant of something like: Rows 1-20 to the left and Rows 21-40 to the right. Only potential families sitting in rows 20-21 would have to be separated at boarding time, but they'd meet right back up in the middle of the airplane.

Re: A Better Way to Load a Plane

#59

Post by nostrademons »

markessien wrote: post #53
nostrademons wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 3 of the last 4 flights I've taken, boarding was the limiting factor. We left the gate within 5 minutes after the last person boarded, and were airborne shortly after without having to wait on the tarmac. On one of those flights, the plane didn't finish boarding until 10-15 minutes after it was scheduled to take off. Curiously, the one exception was a United red-eye back from SF to Boston. And I think they may've…

But when did you start boarding? When did the planes arrive? They usually make you start boarding about 20 minutes before they are allowed to take off, so people sit in the plane the minimum amount of time.

Planes usually arrived about 40-45 minutes, sometimes up to an hour before we started boarding.

In 2 of the 3 flights, that might've been the case. But that other one, we were actually late, so I don't think they delayed boarding so we wouldn't have to wait. Actually, we started boarding about 15-20 minutes after we were scheduled to start boarding.

Cleaning seems like the real bottleneck, but assuming they can't get the flight attendants to work any faster, any time saved on boarding shortens the deplane/clean/board cycle.

Re: A Better Way to Load a Plane

#60

Post by Retric »

markessien wrote: post #38
aneesh wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the time taken for refueling, etc is the limiting factor. There are a couple sequences of events that need to happen (simultaneously) to get the plane ready to leave. Sequence 1: allow arriving passengers to deplane, then clean the plane, board new passengers Sequence 2: Refueling, other maintenance Sequence 3: load checked baggage The time taken to ready the plane is the maximum of the times for the 3…

Boarding passengers takes less than 20 minutes in most cases. Even with very fast airlines like easyjet, the plane sits longer the passengers board. Also, you know that airports queue planes, right? So a plane can't just hurry up to fill in passengers and take off. And in any case, why? Let's say you saved enough time to make an extra trip in a single day, then it would be worth it, but this is not going to save it.…

If the pilot finishes 20 minutes sooner as a stable number you can send out a new pilot and keep going or reduce airspeed and save fuel. If nothing else you can have a large cushion so delays don't propagate though the day. AKA your 10 min late at 10 am and your still 10 min late at 10pm. I suspect most large airplanes fly fairly complex routes so you can consider 30 min a day as 1 / 50th of a virtual airplane if you change which route each plane takes.
Post reply on HN