7 ms·

> If you want passengers to want your plane, design it without sardines in mind; People don't like being sardines. Isn't that something that's more the respons

> If you want passengers to want your plane, design it without sardines in mind; People don't like being sardines. Isn't that something that's more the responsibility of the airlines, who decide how many seats are put in a plane, following the limits of the aircraft? Like if you want more legroom you take a more expensive ticket from a company that doesn't try to cram as many passengers in each plane

ghaff 1y ago
Pretty much. You can outfit pretty much any airframe you want to be business class only seating but not enough people will buy when it pops up on Expedia at 2+ times the price of the alternative. I don't love Economy on long flights either but I'm mostly not willing to pay thousands of dollars out of pocket for a more comfortable alternative for 8 hours or so.
- Filligree 1y ago
  I would buy an upgrade if it was twice the price. In reality it's more like 10x.
  - ghaff 1y ago
    That is, in no small part, because business/first class is being subsidized by economy (and a lot of the passengers in those classes are status upgrades). So, yes, sticker price for upper class service is pretty expensive. In a world where upper class service was the norm on certain routes on certain planes it would probably be pretty expensive but probably cheaper than the upgrade on mixed class service.
    - Thorrez 1y ago
      Do you have a source showing $/sqft of economy vs business/first class? This video is basically saying the opposite of you: that business/first class subsidizes economy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzB5xtGGsTc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzB5xtGGsTc
      - PaulHoule 1y ago
        It might be better to say that they form a system which is economically optimized as a whole. It is genius, for instance, that frequent fliers get upgrades from coach to first class when they're available because it means if a first class flier changes their plans or wants to fly on short notice an economy flier just says in coach and won't feel mad about it -- the first class seats are 100% occupied in terms of providing somebody a somewhat premium experience but are 50% occupied with full revenue customers and that 50% occupation is part of the completely premium experience because it means it is always available.
        ghaff 1y ago
        Yes, I was imprecise in what I wrote. There's a lot of cross-subsidization in various forms going on that makes all-business class at business-class prices tough for airlines even on routes like NYC to London--which have existed but not sure they do at the moment.
        Ekaros 1y ago
        I heard only place where business + premium economy works is ultra long routes. Where people are willing to pay the premium of single leg over multi leg. So it seems people might be willing to pay for time, but not for comfort.
    - cyberax 1y ago
      > That is, in no small part, because business/first class is being subsidized by economy (and a lot of the passengers in those classes are status upgrades). That's the complete 100% opposite of truth. For most airlines, the economy class is just a nice addition to the business class.
- jjmarr 1y ago
  There is a business-class only airline (La Compagnie) that flies from Newark to Europe and they're profitable. A little more expensive than 2x the price though, but less than 10x. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Compagnie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Compagnie
  - nebula8804 1y ago
    Never heard of this airline so I just checked: Over the next few months the cheapest flight from EWR to their base in Orly is ~$2,500 vs ~$365 for Economy (French Bee to be exact). That seems like its still a separate class and would exclude most Economy flyers.
glitchc 1y ago
Yup, as another poster noted, the seating density and comfort are decided by airlines. Aircraft manufacturers install standardized rails for seating and console selection, and allow for many different configurations.
addaon 1y ago
> Isn't that something that's more the responsibility of the airlines, who decide how many seats are put in a plane, following the limits of the aircraft? For pitch, yes. For width, no —- you run into quantization pretty quickly. The difference between sardines and standard economy is less than the difference between 3+3 and 3+2 — it’s not really feasible for most traditional airlines to choose a different number of seats across than the design point. And for a 3+3 setup, adding 6” to fuselage diameter makes a noticeable difference to (wider) passengers, which the airlines can’t really take away.
- Denvercoder9 1y ago
  There's no incentive. Passengers rarely know what type they'll be flying on when they book, and prioritize it over price even less. For airlines, a bigger airplane is a distinct disadvantage though, as it's operationally more expensive (increased cross section equals increased drag equals increased fuel burn).
  - WalterBright 1y ago
    A fully loaded 747 is extremely profitable, the large size has economies of scale. That's why the 747 was very very popular with the airlines. So, yes, a 747 burns more fuel. But the fuel burn per paying passenger is less.
    - bluGill 1y ago
      The real issue with the 747 is people will take a point to point route if at all possible. Worse, flying a small plane point to point is cheaper for the passenger than flying 2 747s. If you live in Lincoln NE - sorry your city is too small to get direct flights to anything but close major hubs (even then odds are you drive to nearby Omaha thus further reducing demand options). However if you live in a Larger non-hub city airlines can undercut each other by just doing direct flights to other large non-hub cities.
      - WalterBright 1y ago
coredog64 1y ago
In airline parlance, this is called "buyer furnished equipment". Boeing sells the airframe (without the engines, even if there's only one choice) and the seats, lavatories, etc. are all provided by the customer. The certifying authority (e.g. FAA/JAA) will have a maximum passenger count for the type. I'm reasonably certain that the BFE has to be certified as well, as you couldn't evacuate the type limit if the aisle wasn't in the center or you mixed 3-2 and 2-3.

ghaff 1y ago

Pretty much. You can outfit pretty much any airframe you want to be business class only seating but not enough people will buy when it pops up on Expedia at 2+ times the price of the alternative. I don't love Economy on long flights either but I'm mostly not willing to pay thousands of dollars out of pocket for a more comfortable alternative for 8 hours or so.

Filligree 1y ago
I would buy an upgrade if it was twice the price. In reality it's more like 10x.
- ghaff 1y ago
  That is, in no small part, because business/first class is being subsidized by economy (and a lot of the passengers in those classes are status upgrades). So, yes, sticker price for upper class service is pretty expensive. In a world where upper class service was the norm on certain routes on certain planes it would probably be pretty expensive but probably cheaper than the upgrade on mixed class service.
  - Thorrez 1y ago
    Do you have a source showing $/sqft of economy vs business/first class? This video is basically saying the opposite of you: that business/first class subsidizes economy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzB5xtGGsTc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzB5xtGGsTc
    - PaulHoule 1y ago
      It might be better to say that they form a system which is economically optimized as a whole. It is genius, for instance, that frequent fliers get upgrades from coach to first class when they're available because it means if a first class flier changes their plans or wants to fly on short notice an economy flier just says in coach and won't feel mad about it -- the first class seats are 100% occupied in terms of providing somebody a somewhat premium experience but are 50% occupied with full revenue customers and that 50% occupation is part of the completely premium experience because it means it is always available.
      - ghaff 1y ago
        Yes, I was imprecise in what I wrote. There's a lot of cross-subsidization in various forms going on that makes all-business class at business-class prices tough for airlines even on routes like NYC to London--which have existed but not sure they do at the moment.
        Ekaros 1y ago
        I heard only place where business + premium economy works is ultra long routes. Where people are willing to pay the premium of single leg over multi leg. So it seems people might be willing to pay for time, but not for comfort.
  - cyberax 1y ago
    > That is, in no small part, because business/first class is being subsidized by economy (and a lot of the passengers in those classes are status upgrades). That's the complete 100% opposite of truth. For most airlines, the economy class is just a nice addition to the business class.
jjmarr 1y ago
There is a business-class only airline (La Compagnie) that flies from Newark to Europe and they're profitable. A little more expensive than 2x the price though, but less than 10x. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Compagnie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Compagnie
- nebula8804 1y ago
  Never heard of this airline so I just checked: Over the next few months the cheapest flight from EWR to their base in Orly is ~$2,500 vs ~$365 for Economy (French Bee to be exact). That seems like its still a separate class and would exclude most Economy flyers.

glitchc 1y ago

Yup, as another poster noted, the seating density and comfort are decided by airlines. Aircraft manufacturers install standardized rails for seating and console selection, and allow for many different configurations.

addaon 1y ago

> Isn't that something that's more the responsibility of the airlines, who decide how many seats are put in a plane, following the limits of the aircraft? For pitch, yes. For width, no —- you run into quantization pretty quickly. The difference between sardines and standard economy is less than the difference between 3+3 and 3+2 — it’s not really feasible for most traditional airlines to choose a different number of seats across than the design point. And for a 3+3 setup, adding 6” to fuselage diameter makes a noticeable difference to (wider) passengers, which the airlines can’t really take away.

Denvercoder9 1y ago
There's no incentive. Passengers rarely know what type they'll be flying on when they book, and prioritize it over price even less. For airlines, a bigger airplane is a distinct disadvantage though, as it's operationally more expensive (increased cross section equals increased drag equals increased fuel burn).
- WalterBright 1y ago
  A fully loaded 747 is extremely profitable, the large size has economies of scale. That's why the 747 was very very popular with the airlines. So, yes, a 747 burns more fuel. But the fuel burn per paying passenger is less.
  - bluGill 1y ago
    The real issue with the 747 is people will take a point to point route if at all possible. Worse, flying a small plane point to point is cheaper for the passenger than flying 2 747s. If you live in Lincoln NE - sorry your city is too small to get direct flights to anything but close major hubs (even then odds are you drive to nearby Omaha thus further reducing demand options). However if you live in a Larger non-hub city airlines can undercut each other by just doing direct flights to other large non-hub cities.
    - WalterBright 1y ago

coredog64 1y ago

In airline parlance, this is called "buyer furnished equipment". Boeing sells the airframe (without the engines, even if there's only one choice) and the seats, lavatories, etc. are all provided by the customer. The certifying authority (e.g. FAA/JAA) will have a maximum passenger count for the type. I'm reasonably certain that the BFE has to be certified as well, as you couldn't evacuate the type limit if the aisle wasn't in the center or you mixed 3-2 and 2-3.