If my fading memory serves me right.all the original 747 100's & 200's were configured 9 abreast in economy.
Now that WAS civilised. ;)

Huck, who ate all the pies on you're flight then :~)

TJ, that American thing is a classic example of markets doing the job. It was a huge promotion started when the industry began to slump last year- they even held a contest to give away the seats they took out. Wouldn't that be a cool conversation piece for the living room? :D The discounters will always have veal-stall pitch but I think market pressure will make the majors open up a bit.

Had quite a pleasant trip LGW-PHL on USAir 2 weeks ago in economy. 6 feet tall (and 13 stone - 85kg) I fit reasonably well into most carriers a/c in "scheduled" config. (US, BA, SV, GF)

The only problem I have found is when somebody is seated next to me who is "very generously proportioned" and too inconsiderate to try to compensate - had a very uncomfortable flight on SV (fortunately under 2 hours) with a neighbour who had a problem fitting between the armrests of his own seat and whose elbows "overflowed" into my face when eating his meal. Whilst I feel sorry for anyone who cannot keep their weight to a "healthy level", I do get p1ssed when they apropriate half of the seat space that I paid for :( Fortunately (or perhaps he was being considerate?) he had the window seat so I would not have been blocked in emergency - he'd certainly have taken time to extricate himself if an evac was required :)

As for charter seats - can't comment as I haven't been on one for ages. But the last time, I was quite happy LHR-LCA when the seat and a week's hotel cost me £150!

[ 08 September 2001: Message edited by: ExSim ]

Pax Man, the choice is simple:

1. Fly charter, who out of shear economics must get the most pax they can onboard. Once one airline squeezes another seat on (with CAA approval) they all have to or no longer be competitive in the cut throat world of tour operators demand. At least you can buy a drink if you want one rather than have the cost of two included in your fare.

2. Pay £200 more and get more legroom and a free drink on a scheduled airline.

Simple really, so dig your hand deeper into your pocket or stop moaning. :rolleyes:

Back to the 'brace position' consideration...

Has the efficacy of this ever been actually demonstrated ? Seems to me if the seats break lose or the belts rupture, then the position of the pax would be pretty much immaterial. If seats stay in place but things are flying round the cabin, fuselage disintegrating etc., then I think I'd want my head up to see it coming and have a chance to dodge or fend off. Should the need arise, I'll scrunch down, put my feet up on the seat in front, hands over the 'jewels' and turtle my head. This sound any better ?

I am in the US at the moment taking advantage of my staff travel benefits and I too had a pleasant suprise at the new seat pitch with AA. Absolutely wonderful! the funny thing is that of all the airlines available to me AA were the only ones with any spare seats!!!!

If anyone can cast their minds back to the Britannia 757 which crashed at Gerona, I think you will find that all 235 pax evacuated from a seat pitch of 28".

Tour operators force charter airlines to put max seats in charter aircraft, and if you want more space you have to pay more, unfortunately it is only a minority who are willing. Try getting a family of four to pay an extra £120 (£30 each) for an extra 2-3" legroom and most won't.

People should quit moaning, like most things in life people get what they pay for.

Unfortunately unless the majority are willing to pay extra, pigs are more likely to fly than charter flights in the UK with 34" seat pitch.

[ 08 September 2001: Message edited by: Next Generation PSR ]

My wife loves dragging me to see musicals in London. You think airline seat pitch is bad .... try sitting through 3 hours of Les Mis in those wretched theatre seats. I can feel a musical DVT lawsuit coming on .......

The worst trip ever experienced was an Air France flight to NBO where the seat pitch was riduculous to the point I am convinced a mistake had been made putting the seats in, it has had the effect however of my never ever traveling AF again. Case of Pavlovian reaction possibly.
'Les Mis' seats were princley by comparison, I was somewhat inconvenienced however by a Sumo tourist sitting in front of me. The deathbed scene created a little more vision occlusion because an equaly huge hankey came out to wipe away the tears which was quite touching. My tears however had already flowed for the cost of the seat where I not only was peering round a pillar but at an extremely big bloke in front. I believe he really enjoyed the show though, singing was good I did hear that.
Pleasantly surprised on BA 777 back from Jed the other day but heard it had been a substitution plane from a longhaul route where the seating is a tad more generous. The new layout is very nice indeed and seating V comfortable, I thought for a bit that I had been upgraded to business but it really was the back. Good one Birdseed it was a nice flight, on time, good cabin service, pleasant staff, made me proud to be a Brit, just get Concord back that'll really make our day

Pax-man
You say you are an experienced flyer so you must have known what the seat pitch would be like on AIH and BY so why book with them? Ignorance is bliss you say and yet you still booked with them. Doh!

A Britman. :confused:

Of course I knew in advance that flying long-haul charter would not be pleasant! We were taking lots of family to a wedding, so there was no other viable option, really.

I seem to be accused of whingeing on! Me? I just thought I was telling it like it is! And it is. Long-haul charter is crap. Full-stop. It's not a whinge, it's a fact!

As for the dead-heads who come out with the 'if you don't like it, tough' rubbish, I thought as intelligent aviators you might be a little more reasoned than that!

Flying to me is still the greatest wonder of the world, and every time I leave the runway I never fail to be awestruck by the sheer magic of this incredible engineering feat. I love being a pax, but it's not much fun when your knees are in your chest! That's all I was saying, I guess.

Pax-man, many of the points you make are correct. The problem is that their are a lot of 'vested interests' who peruse this web site such as charter opeators for example.

I think people have kind of drifted from the original posting, where the article concerned was primarily related to seat pitch and size in relation to safety.

I find it quite bizarre that some in the aviation industry have the belief that it is 'acceptable' to have very cramped seating even if safety is seriously compromised. The study, I believe was designed to address the safety element. It found that safety was compromised to a significant degree with airlines with smallest seats/pitch.

This is an extremely serious matter and hopefully will not be conveniently
'swept under the carpet' for ten years like DVT.

As regards the cost versus room issue in relation to holiday charter flights, the problem is the information given via travel agents. Many people going on 'package' holidays have never been on a plane before, and are seriously surprised when the seats do not live up to the glamorous impression created in the holiday brochures. When booking holidays, the agent always aims to get the lowest price so that the holiday will not be booked via a competitor agent, but most people are not told "by getting you a cheap price, your flight to the canaries will be a truly horrendous experience, and your safety may be compromised in the event of an accident".

Sadly, it is truly ignorant of people in this industry to criticise the passengers for opting for cheap flights when the passengers have no idea at time of booking that their flight would be so cramped.

You will probably find that the majority of passengers who opt for 'premium' charter seats are those who have already flown charter before, or who have been well advised by their agent. I have been on charter flights before, and the look of incredulity and disbelief on some tall passengers faces is remarkable. People who do not fly or work in aviation really do expect the flight will be really comfortable, and are gobsmacked when it is not.

As someone has already said, legislation on minimum seat pitch and size would provide benefits in that all airlines would have to work to the same seating standards. They could then compete on quality of booking/commections/reliability and so on.

I am surprised that the likes of BA have not jumped at this opportunity, as it would give them a considerable advantage against the budget airlines of this world. Stelios would have nightmares.


And all passengers would be happy contented souls (for a while).

I do think the safety element of this needs to be looked at in great detail.

The safety implications have already been looked into. All seating configs in relation to numbers have to pass the rigorous CAA/JAR evacuation test of all off within 90 seconds using half the available exits. It is market forces that decide seat pitch, not safety.

The only completely safe aeroplane is one parked on the ground with no passengers on!! Reality check?

Regulating seat pitch for safety's sake can backfire big-time. Whenever you push up the lowest fares, more people choose a driving holiday instead- and that prospect is truly frightening.

Rigorous, my left foot !
What possible connection is there between a planeload of fit volunteers knowing there's an evacuation coming and they are in no danger, and a load of hysterical suntrippers comprising children, grannies and soused brickies among others ?

Paxboy,
You say you don't mind 'paying a higher fare' for more legroom, and then you go over to the Cabin Crew forum to complain endlessly about the cost of the airfare to the Isle of Man!
Screw loose????

Raise the prices, increase the pitch.

This will have the happy result of decreasing passenger numbers and frustration, and increasing passenger quality and the level of satisfaction of the ones who can afford to fly.

If they can't afford the higher fares, they can stay at home or go to Butlins like last year.

Why let the lowest common denominator determine the industry standard?

[ 10 September 2001: Message edited by: AfricanSkies ]

Flypast: I think that BA will keep well away from this idea! Some of the new 777 that for high density routes, such as Florida, have been specially configured to be 10 seat rows, rather than 9. They use narrow seats and aisles and are then able to get nearly 100 extra seats (I stand to be corrected). As freight is not a main feature of these flights, they can take the weight.

When they were first introduced, they faced an action by a pax who was shown a seat layout of the conventional 9-in a row but found himself on the 10-in a row. If I recall correctly, they settled out of court.

The 10-in a row is not used on all their 777s.

CB: As I have already pointed out. My gripe about IOM flight cost is one of monopoly and lack of interest by the IOM govt. Please do not take the trhead off course with repeat postings of information that I have already corrected. However, I am pleased that you remember my posts so well, given that I made that post more months ago than I can recall.

Paxboy,
As I have said before, you should get your PPL, if money is no object as you are now saying. Then fly 'yourself' to the Isle of Man, therefore not lining any of those nasty airline's pockets. Failing that, go by ferry, failing that stay at home or pay for business class. Who really cares about another few inches of legroom ???
If your time is up, then it's up.
DVT, what crap ?? try spending 7 hours on a N*tional Express bus and you will know what cramped is! Mind you, I suppose they will be ripping seats out next, no more £9 one way fare to London!