4 ms·

I worked for several years in the 90's on United Airlines' computer reservation system, on the team that managed seat reservations. I proposed the window-middle

I worked for several years in the 90's on United Airlines' computer reservation system, on the team that managed seat reservations. I proposed the window-middle-aisle scheme to a task force that wanted to improve boarding times, and they ran a pilot for a while, but never implemented it widely, probably because of how disruptive it was to groups and families. Separately, I have done a lot of flying for business, and I've lost count of how many times I've seen people put their bags in an overhead compartment several rows in front of their assigned seat. The best way to speed up boarding would be to eliminate the overhead compartment entirely. But I don't expect that ever to happen.

bluejekyll 6y ago
> would be to eliminate the overhead compartment entirely. I feel like the incentives are backwards, or not aligned. Airlines are starting to charge for checked baggage, when the overhead compartment is the more valuable asset. They should charge for the overhead space, you get a tag that can be clearly seen from the aisle.
- SilasX 6y ago
  Yeah, I’ve long thought they should charge more for the carryon (or at least for its overhead bin space) than for checked luggage. The latter is more inconvenient for the passenger and imposes fewer real costs on the trip (security screening, boarding/deplaning time). Edit: Earlier discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12439465 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12439465
- xiphias2 6y ago
  Why is the overhead component more valuable asset? Every checked in baggage means less cargo on the plane, which is lost money for the airline.
  - bluejekyll 6y ago
    This is a great point. From the airlines perspective this is true. From passengers perspective I think it’s generally opposite?
    - xiphias2 6y ago
      Yes
- marcosdumay 6y ago
  Checked baggage has a real cost in terms of fuel and aircraft performance. You carrying some means the company can not sell that same amount as cargo. Carry-on has costs that fall mostly on the passengers as a collective. Even the stop time of the plane is shared with other procedures, and more often than not boarding is not the bottleneck.
  - rsj_hn 6y ago
    This suggests airlines don't realize they are selling experiences to customers rather than just hauling potatoes around the country, otherwise they would understand that the passenger cares about when the flight leaves and when they must board it. They don't care if an hour is needed to service the plane between flights so than an hour spent boarding doesn't slow the fleet down, they care how long they need to stand in line. So a clear win for the passenger is to be had that may not increase plane turnaround but still adds value to the flight experience. This lack of consideration of the customer experience is why you feel like a potato being hauled around when you fly a plane in anything other than business class. The first airline that figures out that the customer experience is part of what they are selling and thus should be optimized for is going to make a lot of money even as they manage to charge only a bit more than the average. People will line up to fly them for a more pleasant experience that doesn't require making the seats wider, the plane heavier, or carrying fewer passengers per flight.
    - marcosdumay 6y ago
      > This suggests airlines don't realize they are selling experiences to customers rather than just hauling potatoes around the country Are they? Time and time again low cost companies (what's a codename form the hauling potatoes ones) are successful, every place they offer their services. I suspect you are wrong on this one.
      - rsj_hn 6y ago
        You can easily be cost competitive merely by switching from having overhead be free and full pay for those with checkin baggage to lowering the cost of checkin and increasing cost of overhead. This is a pure lateral move that can be cost neutral in terms of ticket prices, but would improve the customer experience.
toast0 6y ago
> I proposed the window-middle-aisle scheme to a task force that wanted to improve boarding times, and they ran a pilot for a while, but never implemented it widely, probably because of how disruptive it was to groups and families. I haven't booked tickets in large groups, but usually when I fly with family, we're all on the same record and in the same row, so we could get lumped into the same group and optimize our row individually.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
prepend 6y ago
It seems to me that the main speed up is people not having to get up to let people in. So they could let any group flying together with a window go at the same time.

bluejekyll 6y ago

> would be to eliminate the overhead compartment entirely. I feel like the incentives are backwards, or not aligned. Airlines are starting to charge for checked baggage, when the overhead compartment is the more valuable asset. They should charge for the overhead space, you get a tag that can be clearly seen from the aisle.

SilasX 6y ago
Yeah, I’ve long thought they should charge more for the carryon (or at least for its overhead bin space) than for checked luggage. The latter is more inconvenient for the passenger and imposes fewer real costs on the trip (security screening, boarding/deplaning time). Edit: Earlier discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12439465 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12439465
xiphias2 6y ago
Why is the overhead component more valuable asset? Every checked in baggage means less cargo on the plane, which is lost money for the airline.
- bluejekyll 6y ago
  This is a great point. From the airlines perspective this is true. From passengers perspective I think it’s generally opposite?
  - xiphias2 6y ago
    Yes
marcosdumay 6y ago
Checked baggage has a real cost in terms of fuel and aircraft performance. You carrying some means the company can not sell that same amount as cargo. Carry-on has costs that fall mostly on the passengers as a collective. Even the stop time of the plane is shared with other procedures, and more often than not boarding is not the bottleneck.
- rsj_hn 6y ago
  This suggests airlines don't realize they are selling experiences to customers rather than just hauling potatoes around the country, otherwise they would understand that the passenger cares about when the flight leaves and when they must board it. They don't care if an hour is needed to service the plane between flights so than an hour spent boarding doesn't slow the fleet down, they care how long they need to stand in line. So a clear win for the passenger is to be had that may not increase plane turnaround but still adds value to the flight experience. This lack of consideration of the customer experience is why you feel like a potato being hauled around when you fly a plane in anything other than business class. The first airline that figures out that the customer experience is part of what they are selling and thus should be optimized for is going to make a lot of money even as they manage to charge only a bit more than the average. People will line up to fly them for a more pleasant experience that doesn't require making the seats wider, the plane heavier, or carrying fewer passengers per flight.
  - marcosdumay 6y ago
    > This suggests airlines don't realize they are selling experiences to customers rather than just hauling potatoes around the country Are they? Time and time again low cost companies (what's a codename form the hauling potatoes ones) are successful, every place they offer their services. I suspect you are wrong on this one.
    - rsj_hn 6y ago
      You can easily be cost competitive merely by switching from having overhead be free and full pay for those with checkin baggage to lowering the cost of checkin and increasing cost of overhead. This is a pure lateral move that can be cost neutral in terms of ticket prices, but would improve the customer experience.

toast0 6y ago

> I proposed the window-middle-aisle scheme to a task force that wanted to improve boarding times, and they ran a pilot for a while, but never implemented it widely, probably because of how disruptive it was to groups and families. I haven't booked tickets in large groups, but usually when I fly with family, we're all on the same record and in the same row, so we could get lumped into the same group and optimize our row individually.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

prepend 6y ago

It seems to me that the main speed up is people not having to get up to let people in. So they could let any group flying together with a window go at the same time.