Airliner Design Dilemma
Thread Starter
Airliner Design Dilemma
With the recent publicity about squeezing in additional seats on the T7 and 78 to increase the capacity at the expense of pax comfort it occurs to me that Boeing while making hugely successful aircraft in terms of sales didn't do a very good job for the end user (Pax) by making the aircraft too narrow for the optimum number of seats abreast in Y.
oddly Boeing in designing the 76 made it one of the very best planes to fly on as passenger as 2-3-2 is really nice compared say to the DC10 and the dreaded middle block of 5 seats.
However with all that experience why di they not build the T7 a tad wider to accommodate the 747 standard 10 abreast and similarly allow for an extra seat width wise on the 787.
Obviously there are costs involved but it seems to be a bit of a Boeing thing to skimp on width apart from the mighty 74 and the aforementioned 767.
So my question is when they do the huge amount of design work do they take a conscious decision that we will build it this width and if airlines want to risk loads by overcrowding that's there problem.
Of the the biggest contrast in this is to fly on a 380 which is wonderfully comfortable in all classes and a 777 which can feel very cramped by comparison and for my tastes does wallow around quite a bit in the cruise.
PB
oddly Boeing in designing the 76 made it one of the very best planes to fly on as passenger as 2-3-2 is really nice compared say to the DC10 and the dreaded middle block of 5 seats.
However with all that experience why di they not build the T7 a tad wider to accommodate the 747 standard 10 abreast and similarly allow for an extra seat width wise on the 787.
Obviously there are costs involved but it seems to be a bit of a Boeing thing to skimp on width apart from the mighty 74 and the aforementioned 767.
So my question is when they do the huge amount of design work do they take a conscious decision that we will build it this width and if airlines want to risk loads by overcrowding that's there problem.
Of the the biggest contrast in this is to fly on a 380 which is wonderfully comfortable in all classes and a 777 which can feel very cramped by comparison and for my tastes does wallow around quite a bit in the cruise.
PB
Its interesting that the Tristar & DC10 were very similar aircraft but the former had a slightly wider cabin and generally had 10 abreast seating in economy whereas the DC10 had 9, slightly wider seats.
I've often wondered why the 777 cabin wasn't slightly wider so that it could accommodate 10 abreast seating, but it would have been less comfortable. The 350 was redesigned as the 350XWB to meet airline requirements and that is it - manufacturers will consult airlines and try to accommodate their (often differing) requirements. After all they are the buyers in an often competitive market.
The trouble is whatever the width the airlines can put more seats in. Many operators have ten abreast in 777. Air Transat are 9 abreast in A310/330s, Britannia used to have 8 abreast seating in their 767s. Inhuman but it lowers unit costs. Passengers seem to prefer price over comfort.
If you are cynical you could point out that this will encourage travel in premium economy which is generally more profitable for the airlines.
P.S. Any bets as to when an airline will install 11 abreast seating in the A380 main deck? I bit it will happen although I hope I'm wrong.
I've often wondered why the 777 cabin wasn't slightly wider so that it could accommodate 10 abreast seating, but it would have been less comfortable. The 350 was redesigned as the 350XWB to meet airline requirements and that is it - manufacturers will consult airlines and try to accommodate their (often differing) requirements. After all they are the buyers in an often competitive market.
The trouble is whatever the width the airlines can put more seats in. Many operators have ten abreast in 777. Air Transat are 9 abreast in A310/330s, Britannia used to have 8 abreast seating in their 767s. Inhuman but it lowers unit costs. Passengers seem to prefer price over comfort.
If you are cynical you could point out that this will encourage travel in premium economy which is generally more profitable for the airlines.
P.S. Any bets as to when an airline will install 11 abreast seating in the A380 main deck? I bit it will happen although I hope I'm wrong.
Last edited by Peter47; 16th Oct 2015 at 11:12.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What would be the densest sphere packing for human bodies, including forced ventilation between, of course? If laid down, women AND men ;-) , one could scrape off half the heights of the fuselage, pack twice the number of presumed corpse and still have better drag efficiency, BUT will it be fun to fly?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll stick with Airbus thanks, the A330/A340 in 2/4/2 config and when I need to 777 it Cathay do 9 across seating in economy with fantastic catering and cabin service thrown in.
The 767 was designed for 7 across in economy, but 'provisioned' for 8 across. Few operators chose to use 8 across (thankfully). The 777 was designed for 8 across, but 'provisioned' for 9 across. For many years most operators used 8 across, but in the last 10 years 9 across has unfortunately become common. The 787 was designed for 8 across, but 'provisioned' for 9 across - sadly 9 across has become the preferred configuration. Sadly, that's what happens when the SLF shop by price, not by value 
(true story - I recently went into the Boeing travel site to book travel - it would not let me book my preferred flight because it was $4 more than the cheapest option - that's right, four lousy dollars 
).
BTW, there will be some small relief coming on the 777X. Boeing is reworking the fuselage sidewall to make the interior ~6 inches wider.
(true story - I recently went into the Boeing travel site to book travel - it would not let me book my preferred flight because it was $4 more than the cheapest option - that's right, four lousy dollars ).BTW, there will be some small relief coming on the 777X. Boeing is reworking the fuselage sidewall to make the interior ~6 inches wider.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 69
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The space below for baggage / freight containers and pallets also have influence over cabin width. Don't want to chuck out all those old containers, and you do want to fill all the available space.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 777 was designed for 8 across, but 'provisioned' for 9 across. For many years most operators used 8 across, but in the last 10 years 9 across has unfortunately become common.
SeatGuru Seat Map Air France Boeing 777-300ER (77W) Four Class
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 69
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AC has this monster SeatGuru Seat Map Air Canada Boeing 777-300ER (77W) Three Class
458 seats in 3 classes (J/W/Y) including 10 abreast in Y. Rumour has it that AC staff have been banned from taking carry-on, space is so tight.
458 seats in 3 classes (J/W/Y) including 10 abreast in Y. Rumour has it that AC staff have been banned from taking carry-on, space is so tight.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NI
Posts: 1,033
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well it's industry practice to lay the blame for high-density upon passengers shopping by price but since airlines have decided to compete primarily on price what else is Joe Public meant to do*?
When a BA 777 flight is a few quid more than Emirates, BA should be shouting that they are nine-abreast and offer 11% MORE SEAT SPACE. But they don't so Joe just sees two top-tier airlines offering 777 flights and picks the cheapest. Logically enough, since no other metric for distinction is presented.
Then the airline blames Joe for being too price-sensitive and decides to cram-in more Joes to keep revenue up...
* of course folk on this forum and Those Other Ones know how to select an airline by other metrics, but that's a small minority of overall passengers.
When a BA 777 flight is a few quid more than Emirates, BA should be shouting that they are nine-abreast and offer 11% MORE SEAT SPACE. But they don't so Joe just sees two top-tier airlines offering 777 flights and picks the cheapest. Logically enough, since no other metric for distinction is presented.
Then the airline blames Joe for being too price-sensitive and decides to cram-in more Joes to keep revenue up...
* of course folk on this forum and Those Other Ones know how to select an airline by other metrics, but that's a small minority of overall passengers.
Last edited by El Bunto; 18th Oct 2015 at 12:13.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...what else is Joe Public meant to do?
PM
Try 10 across:
Sorry, brain fart - indeed the 777 was designed for 9 across, provisioned for 10 across.
In my defense, I posted that after my bedtime 
Thread Starter
I am a bit puzzled -not hard to do- what does designed for 9 across provisioned for 10 across actually mean-, you cannot after all change the shape of the fuselage , I know you can use thinner insulation and inner shells and the like, narrow the aisles and make provision weight and performance wise for more pax than the base design seating . so does designed mean the physical dimensions are based on 9 a breast but the aircraft performance is adequate for 10 abreast if the airline chooses to narrow the aisles and seats etc
Am I right on that?
PB
Am I right on that?
PB
During the design phase, you design for a theoretical maximum passenger load. That determines such thing as the floor strength, number and location of exits, etc. For single aisle, it's pretty straight forward - determine a minimum seat pitch then count how many rows of seats that provides (I don't think anyone is going to try 7 across on a single aisle).
Wide body it's somewhat more complex (at least in theory, you could put 9 across on a 767). Then the manufacturer certifies for that maximum passenger load - doing things like evacuation tests, etc.
It used to be the only time those max numbers were approached in service was low cost charter operations (first long aircraft trip I ever took was 250 passengers on a DC-8 charter
). But with today's low cost models, scheduled carriers are now regularly approaching those max numbers.
El Bunto - many carriers have some sort of "premium economy" that provide extra room (and sometimes better service/food) at extra cost. Premium economy has proved so overwhelmingly popular that there are usually less premium economy seats than First/Business class seats (and they would often go empty if not for complementary upgrades to frequent flyers).
Wide body it's somewhat more complex (at least in theory, you could put 9 across on a 767). Then the manufacturer certifies for that maximum passenger load - doing things like evacuation tests, etc.
It used to be the only time those max numbers were approached in service was low cost charter operations (first long aircraft trip I ever took was 250 passengers on a DC-8 charter
). But with today's low cost models, scheduled carriers are now regularly approaching those max numbers.El Bunto - many carriers have some sort of "premium economy" that provide extra room (and sometimes better service/food) at extra cost. Premium economy has proved so overwhelmingly popular that there are usually less premium economy seats than First/Business class seats (and they would often go empty if not for complementary upgrades to frequent flyers).
Paxing All Over The World
DaveReidUK May one guess that was a 707/DC8 sized single aisle? I suspect that tdracer was thinking about modern narrow bodies?
Holy 
DR - who and what is that?
DR - who and what is that?