I tell you one thing about the Mil configuration (don't forget the backwards-facing pallet-loaded one too) is that its WAY faster to evac a plane with that config!
No. First off: Where are the overhead bins? Where do I put my laptop?
Second: I do not want to stare at people when I travel. It's bad enough I have to listen to their cell phone conversations. And Last: Where the hell do I place my head to possibly sleep on this sardine can?
FAIL.
@jthh: While I think that seating layout is uncomfortable and inefficient, I wouldn't FAIL it based upon your reasons.
Assuming that it ever will exist and that the layout would be used for commuter flights, then it's really no worse than sitting on a subway or commuter rail (some seats anyway). People tolerate that. I would sit like that going NYC -> DC, providing fares were lower than a standard coach flight.
Laptop goes on your lap or under your seat.. not rocket surgery.
@CaptainSquishy: I feel like the tallness would still be an issue. Everyone is facing the aisle, so anytime a person or cart goes from one end of the plane to the other, you'd have to move your knees. Come to think of it, if acknowledging the crowding by staggering the seats, that seems like a clear indication that those carts are going to have a REALLY hard time getting through. Oh, and i'm looking forward to twisting my body while I use my laptop on those tables.
"Design Q" must have shit for brains if they think their high density design is ever going to be approved some day.
A minor turbulence would be enough to seriously injure someone/everyone with seats like that.
I imagine people poking others in the eye, falling over, bumping heads on others or on sharp ends and tons of other lawsuitable accidents.
See, even the military seats are more confortable and well designed.
There's no leg room (generous gap my ass, you place one fatty in one of those sits and we'll see the generous gap), and if one of those seats/trays break up they basically turn into knives. Also notice they are throat-high, and in a completly awkward position.
If they are going to do something like that (I'd never fly that way, not even short distance, even if it cost 1/4th a regular flight price... my life is more valuable than that), the seats must all "fit" the body nicely to reduce the possibility of people falling off them when turbulence happens.
No flimsy crappy trays or seats. They could use the wasted ceiling space on the middle to store bags, because loose bags under those seats will eventually shift and cause a mess.
And they could add something to hold on.
And that's only what I can think of in a few minutes. This design is something like 10 levels or wrong.
@Bokusatsu_Tenshi: While I am in no way supportive of this design, perhaps you should take a closer look at it.
Most of your arguments seem to hinge on the fact that there would be no seatbelts. With seatbelts (which will be required) most of your arguments are moot.
Also, those tables are NOT throat level, they look to be about elbow level or so.
Finally, it'd be super easy to put a box or net under each seat allowing you to secure your personal belongings.
In a crash, you have people with forces being applied sideways to the body. That's not good for injuries. The standard brace positions won't work. Basically this is just a stupid design.
I propose we move to a system of drug induced sleep then we pack everyone into tubes.
Of course then you'll have some passengers lost like luggage.
"Where's Aunt Edna? Sorry sir it seems we put her on the wrong plane, but please take this complimentary sewing kit and toothbrush with our apologies."
@InsertBullets: Pretty much just like the cargo area of many military aircraft. It's fun to fly around the world in a freaking nylon mesh jumpseat.....
I see no seat belts and on those heavy G take offs, everyone is going to slide to the back of the plane. Worst of all, you will have to make eye contact with the other people on the plane.
09/02/09
09/02/09
Second: I do not want to stare at people when I travel. It's bad enough I have to listen to their cell phone conversations. And Last: Where the hell do I place my head to possibly sleep on this sardine can?
FAIL.
09/03/09
Assuming that it ever will exist and that the layout would be used for commuter flights, then it's really no worse than sitting on a subway or commuter rail (some seats anyway). People tolerate that. I would sit like that going NYC -> DC, providing fares were lower than a standard coach flight.
Laptop goes on your lap or under your seat.. not rocket surgery.
09/02/09
Why stop there? Let's pack them in like sardines like they do in Japan.
09/02/09
09/01/09
I'm a fat guy and the current chairs with arm rests are annoying to get in and out.
On top of that I'm tall also, so my legs won't fit either.
This arrangement seems to fix both of my problems without having to lose weight (thought I really want to) or cut half my legs off.
Edit: I think this would make airplanes more sociable. (and you can look under girls skirts sitting in front of you or boys if that's your thing)
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
A minor turbulence would be enough to seriously injure someone/everyone with seats like that.
I imagine people poking others in the eye, falling over, bumping heads on others or on sharp ends and tons of other lawsuitable accidents.
See, even the military seats are more confortable and well designed.
There's no leg room (generous gap my ass, you place one fatty in one of those sits and we'll see the generous gap), and if one of those seats/trays break up they basically turn into knives. Also notice they are throat-high, and in a completly awkward position.
If they are going to do something like that (I'd never fly that way, not even short distance, even if it cost 1/4th a regular flight price... my life is more valuable than that), the seats must all "fit" the body nicely to reduce the possibility of people falling off them when turbulence happens.
No flimsy crappy trays or seats. They could use the wasted ceiling space on the middle to store bags, because loose bags under those seats will eventually shift and cause a mess.
And they could add something to hold on.
And that's only what I can think of in a few minutes. This design is something like 10 levels or wrong.
09/02/09
Most of your arguments seem to hinge on the fact that there would be no seatbelts. With seatbelts (which will be required) most of your arguments are moot.
Also, those tables are NOT throat level, they look to be about elbow level or so.
Finally, it'd be super easy to put a box or net under each seat allowing you to secure your personal belongings.
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
They obviously didn't think this through. You can fit a lot more people with this layout
09/01/09
Of course then you'll have some passengers lost like luggage.
"Where's Aunt Edna? Sorry sir it seems we put her on the wrong plane, but please take this complimentary sewing kit and toothbrush with our apologies."
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
09/01/09
It's been done before and much better. The only problem was the passengers weren't the most willing to travel and see the world. Go figure.
09/01/09