These again? This comes around every few years then goes away again.
Side note; the A380 is certified to carry 853 people. Anyone fancy that?
If my seat could actually smoothly transition from a sit to a stand position and back again, but be actually comfortable in both positions, my 6'1" ass would be all over that chance to stretch legs / make it easier for window-seaters to get to the aisle but methinks that's not what's being proposed.
Man, who doesn't want to spend 6 hours on a bicycle seat?
Wow, look at that woman's face. It's as if someone is telling her to smile or they'll shoot her kid in the head.
If this ever becomes a thing I have a feeling ocean liners will come back into fashion.
As long as these are the lavatories, I'd say this is more convenient than bothering the person next to you when you need to go.
Why would this be such a bad thing? I'd like to be able to afford to fly more often, and to burn less fuel when I do. I'd sacrifice some comfort for that. Although I wish they'd build horizontal boxes so they could pack us in tighter but also have us lying down.
Still surprised that the Japanese capsule hotel concept hasn't had consideration for airline use...
Can't they just reduce us to some sort of slurry, load us all into a tank, and then reconstitute us at the other end?
Time for me to submit my own patent request.
Probably just me, but looking at the patent image, I saw it kind of like this:
and what better motivation could their be to just keep cranking than you will fall from the sky if you do not?
Wouldn't the "conga line" count as prior art?
Well, if Airbus patents it, at least they might block Boeing from using the patent.
This is lousy for many reasons, but a couple people have not mentioned:
- No under-seat storage in front of you (so forget that "handbag" in addition to your carryon)
- Your head is where the carryon bins should be, so forget about carryons at all.
You might get carryon bins if you're on a plane with a LOT of headroom, but that's going to make it quite claustrophobic (even moreso than planes current are!). I would like to think that this idea will never fly, but I won't put anything past the airlines, especially the low cost carriers.
I think this must be a regulation thing (how do seatbelts work when you are lying down?), but I've long hoped to someday get on a plane with a honeycomb sleeping tube arrangement, especially for some 10 hour redeye flight. The downside is that you know people will need an hour to figure out how to stuff their body into the bunk and make boarding take forever.
Prestuff people into their honeycomb tubes at the gate, sedate them, then pack the tubes into the plane.
The sad thing is I almost agree with you. The only thing holding me up is that planes don't have a way to just swing open the whole half of the plane and let someone load in the passengers with a forklift once they've been properly secured.
And at least one more reason: actual humans don't come in uniform height.
I once flew in the same section of coach as actor Carel Struycken. As uncomfortable as he must have been being squeezed into a standard-sized seat, I daresay this arrangement would probably be even worse. Same deal for Peter Dinklage.
I have often (only half-jokingly) said that they will eventually anesthetize us and stack us naked like cordwood. Your answer appears to take my idea to 11. Well done, sir (or madam).
Following a brief search, I found that The Onion has also considered my idea: http://www.theonion.com/articles/united-airlines-exploring-viability-of-stacking-th,2841/
Looks comfortable enough...
As usual the Onion kills it with the captions:
The rule on the Onion is the shorter the funnier.
next page →