Seat Allocations

[JonF]

Just wondering why airlines such as Easyjet and Ryanair don't allocate seats. Does is it save money? And if so how? As surely its all done on computer and may entail only a few extra keystrokes on keyboard.

Or is it so they can sell priority/speedy boarding?

Looking at other forums the rush for seats etc is one of biggest things people moan about.

[22/04]

It may be a mixture of these, but I think the main reason is it enables quicker boarding overall

[RevMan2]

It reduces complexity.
Complexity costs money.
Or time.
Which is money

Simple as that.

[JonF]

How complex can it be, other airlines have been allocating seats for years, its not as if new systems need to devised. Does it really speed up boarding? Every time i've flown with these two carriers there is always an almighty crush at the boarding gate with people fighting, well almost, to get to front of queue!

[PAXboy]

If you have a computer system that allocates seats, that costs money to buy and maintain. It costs hardware to run it on and then you have to print tickets. You have disputes at the check in desk of who wants to sit where and who booked what kind of seat on the web site. That takes time. Thus Money, Money, Money!

Also, if you have allocated seats, the pax will get mixed up as to where they are to sit and get shirty if they think that someone is in their seat (even if they cannot read their own boarding card. The CC have to sort out these problems and it is quicker (money!) to say "Sit where ever you wish".

[Final 3 Greens]

Funny how Southwest manage to allocate seats, despite all these 'problems.'

And their model is the one that newcomers in Europe copied.

[Jes]

The tension around the pre-boarding scrum is why I've switched from Ryanair Gatwick to Aer Lingus Heathrow for my regular Dublin trips.

[wiggy]

Jes
I tend to agree, at "my" airport it's close to fistycuffs at the gate coming up boarding time, and it's funny how many seemingly well educated Brits don't know their alphabet......
I travel both EZE and BA on the same route - I reckon there's sod all difference in the time it takes to board and get sat down because of the scrum around the gate and again on the aircraft with EZE.

Paxboy
IMHO "sit wherever you wish is fine" in an ideal world, if everyone just took a random seat, but they don't. Just about everyone wishes to sit at the front - so you get a massive backlog onto the jetty as people climb over pax in aisle seats to get into, for example 3A or 3F..they won't move a few rows back to the aisle empty seats and that's why on just about every departure you hear the EZE cabin crew pleading with passengers to move down the aircraft because there are plenty of seats at the back.

[Rush2112]

It certainly doesn't help the passengers, I find the whole Easyjet / Ryanair experience a nightmare for that reason: scrum round the gates at boarding and everyone trying to get a seat at the front. Wiggy's point is exactly right, the queue to get on the plane backs down the steps etc as those who bagged rows 1 - 5 faff about getting their seat.

Computer systems are cheap as chips these days, seat allocation software must be pretty old hat I'd have thought.

[James 1077]

I always thought that the reason was that if you have your seat allocated then you hang around the airport buying that last bottle of whisky / having that final cup of coffee.

If you don't then you make sure you are at the gate nice and early.

Therefore allocated seats mean that you may have an aircraft sitting on the ground waiting for late passengers.

[lexxity]

bmibaby are a loco who allocate seats, still manage to do a 25 minute turn round. The check in system is cheap as chips, but gets the job done.

[Middle Seat]

Uhm....Southwest doesn't allocate seats. They allocate boarding groups. They have done some testing of allocated seating in selected markets, but no announcement has been made that it will be adopted systemwide.

Boarding Procedure
Each Customer will be issued a boarding pass grouped by A, B, or C (in that order) based on when the Customer checked in online at southwest.com, at the Skycap Podium, Ticket Counter, Departure Gate, or E-Ticket Check-In kiosk (where available).

Prior to general boarding, Customers with disabilities, unaccompanied children between the ages of five and 11, and adults traveling with a child under five years of age will preboard. Customers who choose to preboard cannot sit in an emergency exit seat.

Because Southwest Airlines maintains an open-seating policy, general-boarding Customers may sit in any open or unclaimed seat. Customers holding boarding pass "A" will begin general boarding, followed by Customers with boarding pass "B," and then "C." General-boarding Customers who choose an emergency exit seat must meet all requirements set forth by the Federal Aviation Administration and Southwest Airlines.

[TotalBeginner]

I happen to work on behalf of a certain orange outfit and their so called priority boarding system is by no means fast!

4 boarding groups result in 4 announcements. Not to mention having to turn people away that "didn't understand" :ugh:

If you allocate seats, it can be done just as quickly. If you're boarding with front and rear steps, you advise which steps correspond to which rows in your announcement. If you're only using the L1 door then board the rear first, simple!

If you have a computer system that allocates seats, that costs money to buy and maintain. It costs hardware to run it on and then you have to print tickets. You have disputes at the check in desk of who wants to sit where and who booked what kind of seat on the web site. That takes time. Thus Money, Money, Money!

With the exception of Ryanair, (until the end of the year) all of the EU low-cost airlines are using a computerised Departure Control System, be it their native system, or that belonging to the handling agent. To create a flight that has Assigned seating requires nothing more than the touch of a button.

I always thought that the reason was that if you have your seat allocated then you hang around the airport buying that last bottle of whisky / having that final cup of coffee.

If you don't then you make sure you are at the gate nice and early.

Therefore allocated seats mean that you may have an aircraft sitting on the ground waiting for late passengers.

In my experience this is not the case. You will get late passengers whatever the outfit. 9 times out of 10 people who are late through their own stupidity couldn't give a to** about where they sit on the aircraft!

[Bangkokeasy]

From SLF point of view, having flown most flavours of loco, there doesn't seem to be any difference in the time taken to actually board the aircraft, whether seats allocated or not. Locos out here, such as Jetstar Asia and Tiger Airways, use allocated seating. This is done using a laptop computer and small portable printer, the boarding pass is a flimsy piece of paper similar to some credit card receipts. There may be a small discussion at checkin if someone wants to sit with someone else, but nothing compared to the luggage repacking scrummage and dirty great long queues that are experienced at Stansted.

It's little things like this that enable the passengers to kid themselves for a moment that they might be flying a more expensive airline. Can't be a bad thing for the loco, at minimal cost.

[iain8867]

For my sins I used to check-in FR flights:}

Sometimes when time and staffing levels were at a premium we would open up a flight on the system and check the passengers in via the computer. FR do not pay for this service but sometimes we would use it, FR found out, and put a stop to it. We didn't allocate seats just number the passengers like FR wanted us to, but they will not pay for the system to be used. Hence with most airports, other than those that have to have computerised check-in, it is a manual check-in. With this system it is near on impossible to allocate seats. So basically FR will not pay for it, allocation of seats can be done manually but it takes longer and so ups the cost to FR.

So as most on here may know, FR, do everything on the cheap, FD pay for their rating, CC pay for their training and uniforms.

:ugh:

[Final 3 Greens]

With this system it is near on impossible to allocate seats.

Before computer check in, there was a very fast way of allocating seats.

The check in agent had a sheet with a graphic of the aircraft and each seat was represented by a sticky label, e.g. 5B.

When s/he allocated that seat to a pax, the sticky label was peeled off and affixed to the boarding pass.

Much faster than computerised check in these days (although not so thorough)

[TotalBeginner]

Before computer check in, there was a very fast way of allocating seats. The check in agent had a sheet with a graphic of the aircraft and each seat was represented by a sticky label, e.g. 5B. When s/he allocated that seat to a pax, the sticky label was peeled off and affixed to the boarding pass. Much faster than computerised check in these days (although not so thorough)

Maybe in the days of operating a 30 seater turboprop, but if you're checking in a Ryanair 738 with 189 seats you won't get away with one agent. This means the staff have to pass the sticky seat-plan back and forth amongst themselves which is hardly ideal.

The check-in system that I'm using is very quick. You don't even have to enter a seat number. You can simply hit W for window or A for aisle and it will seat the passengers to maintain an even bay split. If you have somebody who is particularly fussy about the row they want, then of course you can enter the exact seat. It's no extra hassle really!

[TotalBeginner]

Sometimes when time and staffing levels were at a premium we would open up a flight on the system and check the passengers in via the computer. FR do not pay for this service but sometimes we would use it, FR found out, and put a stop to it

Funnily enough, I used to work for a handling agent that decided to impliment their DCS on the Ryanair product simply because they were so fed up with all the errors caused by manual check-in.

It was all going really well until one day MOL checked in for a flight to Dublin and happened to notice that his boarding card was handed to him from a printer. I've never seen a man go so Red and use such foul language! Needless to say, we were back to pen and paper within the hour!

Bit of a thread creep, but does anyone know how Ryanair are handling the new requirements for APIS data on flights departing the UK and IRE for Spain?

[Final 3 Greens]

TotalBeginner

30 seat turboprop?

I was thinking about the 747 classic, TriStar, DC10 all of which had rather more seats (and classes) than a 738.

Miraculously, they used to share the plan between desks without any of the huffle puffle you imagine.

You yoofs don't know much about how things used to be ;)

[TotalBeginner]

Actually, I remember in 2002, flying from Bridgetown Barbados with Airtours who were using manual check-in at the time and it was executed very well (A330). They had a giant concertina folder which was labelled alphabetically with pre-printed boarding cards in each slot. The seatplan was stuck on the wall behind the weigh scales.

It was quite funny, because passengers were literally choosing their own seats by pointing at the seatplan...down a bit, no, left a bit.... it really made me laugh! :}

I must confess I still prefer to use a DCS though :rolleyes:

[Shropshire Lad]

Seem to remember GO used to offer you the option of selecting your seat - never seemed to slow the flights up I travelled on and gave you a much better service all round.

The "check in early and get the best seat" option is somewhat flawed. My particular favourite was flying an early morning flight from Newcastle - checked in early got boarding group A and was promptly put on a bus to travel 200 metres to the aircraft. Unfortunately as were the first ones on we were herded down the back of the bus and were the last ones off!! Pure genius!:ugh: Who said customer service is not an issue any more???

It does seem that allocating seats can be much quicker

[Dryce]

Having commuted using EZY in the past I'd say the lack of seat allocation and 2 doors to board is faster. Using 1 door to board and there's no difference.

I've always preferred to board in the 60-90 grouping as I get a decent chance to pick who I sit with as opposed to having somebody at checkin do it.

[PAXboy]

Wiggy - I agree with you! I am not defending 'free seating'. I have often seen them all clag up the front rows and the only time I like that - is when they are also boarding at the back and I can skip round and pick anywhere in the rear two thirds of the a/c!!

The folks who want the front rows may well be hand luggage only but many have checked bags and sitting at the front ain't gonna make no never mind!!

One of the biggest problems with the Southwest boarding method (Groups A/B/C) or the EZY method (groups of 30) is when the gate staff ignore the people who queue jump because they cannot take the (unjustified) comments and bad behaviour of our fellow pax. I can sympathise but am highly irritated to see folks not being turned back or, last year at LGW, no further announcements made after first call and so people just went forward when they felt like it, turning into a scrum.

This problem has been discussed here on several occasions... :sad:

[TotalBeginner]

Another problem with priority boarding, is that in order for it to be strictly ahered to, the agent must check every boarding group or sequence number religiously. This is a possible distraction from the more important things that should be checked on a boarding card and in my opinion is another task to slow things down.

If you allocate seats and ask for passengers in rows 12-30, ok maybe only 70% or so will get it right, but it's not something that needs to be checked. If passengers seated at the front slip through, it's not the end of the world. However, if you let someone down in the wrong boarding group, you're likely to start a riot! :rolleyes:

Bit of a thread creep here, but has anyone ever boarded a flight with a gate reader set to comfort boarding. How accurate is this at checking seat numbers?

[Avman]

It is a strict personal policy of mine to avoid loco airlines that don't offer seat allocation. Fortunately for me, the area I fly from boasts several EXCELLENT loco carriers which not only provide seat allocation but also offer the option of this at the booking phase.

[WHBM]

I last had sticky numbers put onto a boarding pass from a big chart about two weeks ago - and it was on BA !

St Petersburg, in Russia. BA use a handling agent who are unable to print BP's from the system, so it's back to the old methods.

Now while we are speaking about Russia we could take a page from their book of pax handling from the old Soviet days, where for many operations involving a group of pax, such as showing visas at immigration, or checking in at Intourist hotels, you all had to line up in the same alphabetical order that your tour leader had on their paperwork. Possibly this would be the ultimate answer to boarding scrums.

[Vasto1M]

As an aside . . . Ryanair seem to have gotten over their computerised check-in phobia. Dublin now as a sparkly new DCS system and a certain new base has made it clear to FR that the only way they would check-in the flights was via a computerised system. Still seems odd that STN are pen and paper though.

[TotalBeginner]

Still seems odd that STN are pen and paper though.

Apparently not for much longer. Trials in Dublin using OpenSkies have been successful and following talks with ARINC it is hoped that the same system will be up and running at the end of October (start of the winter schedule).

I guess it will have to be implemented in stages while staff are trained?

[mansp]

I can remember the old days of checking in a 757 on my own, manuel check-in, used to be done in an hour and half. Just couldn't do it now with
computer check-in.

Always a worry though when you found '29a' stuck to your elbow on the way home.....

[22/04]

Within the last 18 months have been maually checked in for a VS flight at either Narita or Delhi, can't remember which. This was a practice for system failure and was much slower, though pax were made aware by notices.

Anyone comment whether this is done everywhere - can't imagine it at T3 LHR - cause mayhem

[groundhand]

The great FR manual system relates directly to a long running dispute that MOL was having with Aer Rianta in DUB over DCS charges. he would not allow STN to go DCS as this would blow his arguement with DUB. Seems as if this has now been resolved so expect to see STN change quickly. Common check-in would reduce the desk requirement by approx 30%. A no brainer.

The nostalga for the old manual systems were, of course, before all the requirements of security today. The level of 'monitoring' of PNL's and DCS systems by the authorities is one of the real benefit of DCS.

[fyrefli]

I'm with Dryce, on non-allocated being faster with EZY, particularly with two-door boarding - and especially when you have a sufficiency of pax who know whether the destination will be two-door offloading. Clued-up gate handlers often help by adding this extremely useful five-second snippet of info to an announcement.

Then again, my usual departure airport is AMS, where they pre-board into the A, B, C, D queues first, so no scrum and no 90 people all queued up claiming to be in group A ;) Doesn't always work with the new security farce but generally goes well.

[in-my-opinion]

Groundhand - Could not agree more about the benefits of a move to DCS for FR at STN. Nothing more frustrating for pax in a lonq queue at one dedicated desk, to see an agent 'idle' at another one adjacent, but that agent not able to check them in.

[groundhand]

22/04 Testing manual check-in used to be a common requirement in 3rd party ground handling agreements. As DCS systems got more and more reliable it slipped from usage. Very rarely in the SLA these days.

fyrefli - Agree when talking A319 with both doors in use. However, a B737 on an airbridge is substantially slower to board (by whatever control you use) as the aisle is so much narrower it prevents passengers passing the ditherers as they stand to take off their coat/jacket/hat/child etc. before sitting down.
Have worked many systems for EZY in different European airports. Good boarding lounge layout, 2 sets of steps and good communication in the language of the passengers is the key. Having said that, boarding Italians will always be a scrum no matter what you tell them, what system you use and no matter how many gate staff are available. Patience and queuing are alien to their culture!

[fyrefli]

Agree B737 on an airbridge isn't optimal but is it any faster with allocated seats? As you say, the main delays are caused by the "ditherers"; don't they cause even worse problems with allocated or are you meaning allocated with sequential boarding based on part of aircraft?

[FWOF]

I think the probs I have seen with EZY are that people are very much selectively deaf, not stupid, just plain ignorant. The announcement CLEARLY states, Passengers who have purchased Speedy Boarding etc., but you still get a group of numptys shuffling forward just to be sent back. Even worse is the Friday trip back from Belfast to the UK where without fail, there is a group of ten or more DRUNK lads on their way for a weekend away, who get in the way, shout all over the announcments, save seats for their mates, QUEUE for the loo before take off and STILL get served beer on board.

I like the seat allocation service with EZY ... you gets what you pay for.

[fyrefli]

Oh, BRS is dreadful too, except if you have clued up people running the gate. Unfortunately there's only a couple of those ;) I applauded one of them once for announcing, "I've called group A which consists of 30 people; there's at least 70 of you in the queue; when the 40+ people in the queue who aren't in group A leave the queue, we'll continue to board."

Can't do it all the time but it only takes a couple of times to start getting the message across. At the old D gates at AMS they sometimes used to simply impose a rule that if you came up too early you didn't just have to wait until your group was called, you boarded last; hardly added to the overall boarding time, just inconvenienced the selectively deaf.

[in-my-opinion]

Of course boarding priority by security number (or group) all goes a bit out of the window if in fact the aircraft is at a remote stand and a bus is involved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[slim_slag]

Couple of days ago I saw a loco give priority boarding passengers their own bus which went out first. Thought that was appropriate.