Seat Backs

[bsmasher]

Why Oh Why have some new seats gone away from the mesh pocket for storage of stuff.
On today's flight the seat ( A320) had a moulded document holder just above the tray table , no room for much beyond the safety card and a newspaper at a squeeze. This meant my book for reading had to sit on my lap ( actually the spare seat next to me) for the majority of the flight , carefully positioned to become a projectile in the case of turbulence or worse. Perhaps there is a bit more legroom with the holder up high but at the expense of being able to get most things stored in the unlikely event of. . . .

[PAXboy]

By moving the pocket to the higher level, it can be an aid to increase the seat pitch and make it easier for knees to fit. Probably by only half an inch - but the publicity kids can make a mile out of that.

[easyflyer83]

And it stops passengers using them as rubbish bins......which clearly they are not.

[primreamer]

Theres a cost and maintenance angle to the change too. The old style seat pockets, whether mash or fabric, frequently became torn due to sustained use and overloading. The thin metal frame used to give the pocket its shape was susceptible to breakage and this is not only unsightly but can be an injury hazard during passenger egress. As a previous poster said the new seats without pockets do give the impression of greater legroom and the molded plastic stowage should stand up to abuse a bit better.

[wowzz]

To be fair, how many pax have become incapacitated by a flying paper-back ?

[Piltdown Man]

An airline can have whatever seats it wants installed in its aircraft at whatever pitch it desires. If you don't like the seats, write to the airline.

[grounded27]

And passengers do destroy seats. Profit/loss analysis would probably veer towards midget class with hard plastic seats. No need to write the airline, many different airline business models have toyed with seat pitch as a marketing pitch and a profit maximizer. The load factors drive seat pitch, nothing else.

[PAXboy]

... many different airline business models have toyed with seat pitch as a marketing pitch and a profit maximizer. Indeed, grounded27.

The most recent was American Airlines. From about 2000 onward, for their long haul fleet, they made a BIG campaign of removing rows of seats - the TV adverts showed the seats being physically removed .

Over the next four years, they did not sell enough extra seats because the client bought soley on price. The rows of seats were quietly put back in.

[Piltdown Man]

The load factors drive seat pitch, nothing else.

I disagree, it's yields that drive seat pitch. Some people (like my parents, spending their grandchildren's inheritance) are prepared to pay more to have a certain degree of comfort.

[Mr @ Spotty M]

You obviously have never looked at the regulations have you.
Every a/c has a max number of pax they can carry, so you can not reduce the seat pitch and get as many seats as you wish.
In the UK, regulations are in place to insure a minimum seat pitch and where the measurements are taken.
Where this measurement is taken is why some seats now have the seat pocket above the seat table.

[Recordman]

The best thing that can be done to a seat back is to electrify the top of it. Hopefully, it will prevent the passenger sitting behind me from using my seat back as a 'pull up' when they sit down or get up!

[5711N0205W]

Recently flew in a Lufthansa 321 and the seats were of a slim design but very comfortable and maximising the pitch availability.

Shame about the catering though, Mullerice :)

[Piltdown Man]

You obviously have never looked at the regulations have you. Every a/c has a max number of pax they can carry, so you can not reduce the seat pitch and get as many seats as you wish. In the UK, regulations are in place to insure a minimum seat pitch and where the measurements are taken. Where this measurement is taken is why some seats now have the seat pocket above the seat table.

Well I think you'll find that the maximum number of seats that can fitted to any aircraft is way above the number that can be reasonably accommodated. For example I believe the Boeing 737-800 can have a 'standard' maximum of 189 seats (a manufacturer limit - the aircraft was EASA certified with zero passenger seats). Apart from the greediest of operators, how many others operate at this capacity? This is what the UK CAA (or Europe of you like) says on the subject:

The minimum distance between the back support cushion of a seat and the back of the seat or other fixed structure in front is approximately 66 cms (measured at 75mm above the seat cushion) in the take-off and landing configuration, that is with seats in the upright (unreclined) position only.

Which is basically 26", plus the thickness of the cushion, say 2" which means that the pitch effectively becomes an oppressive 28". But by using thin seats and no pockets, say 1", you could end up with a 27" pitch. Also, by 'clever' engineering, some seat manufacturers have moved seat pockets to avoid them being measured and some operators specify seats with no pockets at all. And you want to jam more seats in? No problem, just so long as the operator pays Boeing for more seats to be included in its paperwork.

I think Bsmasher has a reasonable gripe, why are his favourite seats no longer fitted? It's a reasonable question, especially as he's paying for the privilege of sitting there.

PM

[bsmasher]

why are his favourite seats no longer fitted? It's a reasonable question, especially as he's paying for the privilege of sitting there.

I reckon some of the other new seats where the pivot has been moved up to level with my knees are better - it least when the seat in front is reclined my legroom stays almost the same.
I'd not thought about the maintenance and litter problems that the mesh backs had - good reasons to adopt something different. I dont know in this case how much better the legroom is - I'd got an exit row, probably why the inability to stow everything was on my mind.

[Mr @ Spotty M]

I like your logic but it does have a slight floor, in that the measurements must be as the a/c is equipped for service.
This means the seat has to be dressed and the literature pock has to include what an operator places in it for the pax.
I witnessed many years back a B767 that was reconfigured to its max seating figure.
The a/c was checked after the change by the local CAA surveyor and he would not approve the change, because we were not meeting the seat pitch measurements.
He eventually allowed the a/c a dispensation to operate for a limited time, this with the conditions that the in flight magazines and headsets were not allowed to be in the pockets for take-off & landing.
I read the flight reports from the cabin crew and they rightly pointed out if they did have an emergency evacuation there would have been carnage. This due to the the magazines were strung out all over the floor.
This type of problem is why seats were developed into the shapes that they appear today.
If you look carefully at the newer types of seats on "IT" or low cost operators you will notice that the back of the seat is shaped or sculptured with a curve or reduction in foam at the critical point where the measurements are taken.
Thomson was one of the first operators to start fitting the type of seat with the pocket behind the seat table and Jet2 have followed.
I have read reports that the seat is comfortable for short flights, but some say they would not like a long trip seated in them.
I also have to disagree on your assumption with numbers of seats and greedy operators.
The max number of seat you can fit to a B737-800 is as you point out is 189 and that is also the same for the B737-900.
Most "IT" or low cost operators operate at 189 and l can assure you they would fit more seats if the could.
Why do you think the B737-900 has not sold in Europe to the type of operators l have mentioned. It is because you can not fit any more seats even though the a/c is bigger.
I am sorry to say that Joe public wants a very cheap flight and that is why we get these terrible uncomfortable seats.
Yes l do understand that Bsmasher has a reasonable gripe, why are his favourite seats no longer fitted, l am sorry to say it is progress.
It is seat manufacturers meeting the demand from the airlines to reduce cost, weight and meet what the airlines want.
So l would guess you will find very few economy seats designed the way they were and if so they would be more expensive to buy.

[PAXboy]

Clearly stated Mr @. You have shown how the carriers will meet the regulations, irrespective of anything else. In the UK, companies and govt departments have become brilliant at meeting the rules and ticking the boxes - irrespective of the end result. If it meets the regs - than that is good.

In a period of global financial contraction that has years to run, expect this forum to contain a continuing list of things that carriers no longer do as well as they did:


service / politeness
food
drink
comfort
adding extra stops to add extra pax
dropping stops to speed round trip times and save fuel
dropping routes
dropping frequencies
using ETOPS wherever possible

Oh, I see that we have already started. :}

[jeanyqua]

[QUOTE] The best thing that can be done to a seat back is to electrify the top of it. Hopefully, it will prevent the passenger sitting behind me from using my seat back as a 'pull up' when they sit down or get up.!


:D:ok::D:ok::D...Excellent !!!!!