robocoder

In case you missed it: Ryanair is a for profit organization. You booked on Ryanair because they were the cheapest, and you were too cheap to pay extra for pre assigned seats. If Ryanair would have given you seats together the next time you definitely wouldn't have paid extra (you proved you were cheap booking them in the first place), so it is definitely in their best interest to put everyone who doesn't pay extra for a seat-assignment in a middle seat as far away from the rest of their group as possible. If you don't like that fly legacy (or Netjets). I remember when the charter company I worked for doubled their profit margin by not handing out free news papers (it went from $1 to $2 per pax......). We all are trying to get the cheapest ride and then complain about the race to the bottom.

In the end we are still fighting a global pandemic whilst trying to keep air travel numbers up. In that Situation it makes absolutely no sense to let strangers sit together because of some algorithm. Also it makes no sense to keep your distance in the airport just to suddenly give a crap about it once the aircraft reaches the parking position. Been there, saw it. So yes, Ryanair should be made responsible for that.

hans brinker: I fly what I fly depending on context, and sometimes not even for personal reasons. You bet that if I fly with a company, I feel free to criticize its practices as part of the bargain; and I factor in these practices for whenever I have a choice on the flights I buy.

Back on topic, FR's algorithm is opaque, profit-driven, and (IMHO) offensive for little to no gain in at least some cases (like half-empty planes), yet it has an impact on public health. There are growing concerns about the opaque algorithms that increasingly govern our lives and, being from a computer science background myself, I'm happy these things are scrutinized.

Luke258

So what, are all other airlines acting differently at the waiting area?

Well blow me down!

Many would say, with some justification, that trying to "keep air travel numbers up" makes absolutely no sense while fighting a global pandemic.
We are not even trying to keep train travel numbers up, or bus travel - quite the contrary with social distancing rules still in place.

Um, I think FR's entire operation is profit-driven, it's a business. We either nationalise or subsidise airlines (see bus, trains above, noting that in the UK the entire railway industry is now effectively nationalised as a result), or they have to be profit driven to survive. They have to be profit-driven within the rules of course, which goes back to the purpose of the thread - are they breaking the rules or not? Let's see the rule the their seating algorithm is breaking.

From Bloomberg:If train or bus travel involved using air-conditioning that was anywhere near as good as in an airliner, then this attempted comparison with air travel might not be the 'chalk and cheese' comparison that it is now.

I am talking about what happens once on Blocks. The waiting area or Gate area is airport responsability. And yes other Airlines are acting differently. They disembark row by row.

To my knowledge ryanair disembarks by row as well, flown 10 days ago pmo bgy

For those horrified with the prospect of sitting next to a stranger, some Chinese airlines offered (and probably still offer) the opportunity to book the adjacent seats at a reduced cost, maybe 50% of the cost of that seat for a fare-paying passenger. This way, the seat is not "wasted" from a commercial standpoint and the customer gets their much-needed peace of mind.

As for the overall concept of social distancing on aircraft - if it's that important to have social distancing everywhere and regardless of masks, sophisticated air conditioning etc, then why is it that I haven't seen many terrestrial vehicles which have had their capacity chopped by a third or more for the sake of it? Why TfL can run packed tube trains with extremely primitive ventilation and certainly no disinfection on each station, but at the same time Ryanair should not be allowed to fly a full aircraft? Can we speak of a "level playing field" when social distancing rules apply to airlines with a huge cost base, but not to bus operators? Surely owning/leasing and running a coach costs cheaper than owning/leasing and running a 737? This is simply discriminatory. Especially in the light of the fact that aircraft have been proven to be far more COVID-safe than many other closed environments.

Not sure where you have been looking, but buses and trains definitely being restricted in UK, which is where I am and where I know. To quote a local bus service FAQ:

And long distance, from the MegaBus FAQ:

So that's buses - 50% capacity reduction. Trains (at least mainline) are running seat-reservation only, and with reduced capacity, again to quote a train FAQ (my emphasis):

They are clearly running at reduced capacity as well. The trains have all been nationalised, effectively, they are probably all loss-making now. Buses are usually subsidised by local government anyway

My understanding of the tube is that usage is way down, but at peak covid TFL were allegedly running 20-30% of services (for 20% of pax) because they "Had 30% off sick" according to the mayor, who clearly isn't very good at maths. He also isn't very good at telling the whole truth either as it's been revealed since that TFL in fact furloughed thousands of staff at the time, to save money. TFL is broke too, already had to be bailed out by the government, with more needed in autumn, which is going to get interesting because Boris may fancy letting it go bust and taking it off the mayor entirely.

Cars are, anecdotally, running at reduced capacity too - when groups are driving somewhere to meet they are no longer sharing cars across households. That's just anecdotal based on our household experience though.

Bikes and scooters are same capacity as before, but then they are nearly all single-seat anyway.

What other terrestrial vehicles are there?

Respectfully, not sure where you have been looking either Infrequent ?
I flew EJ from France to UK 2 weeks ago on a flight that was 50% full. I return on Friday on one which (currently) looks much less booked. Many cancelled after the 14th August rule-change, so that’s no surprise. Yesterday we boarded a Park n Ride BUS in Devon which was 100% fully seated. No doubt there is a variation between an operator's declarations and what is actually happening.

Replacing strategic and logical planning with panicky reactive legislation is what is making it hard for everyone.

I hope the airlines survive...

Well, yes, not disagreeing about that. When I jumped in it was more because I see a lost opportunity for FR [to regain some goodwill, if not to squeeze even more money from us] in this matter of seating, even if everything is already done within the legality.

I quoted directly from internet pages on official travel operator internet sites, that is where I have been looking.

I haven't personally left the house for over 5 months, I chose to "shield" some weeks before the doctors actually advised me that I was clinically extremely vulnerable, a decision that quite possibly saved my life, as my wife (in a high risk occupation) then brought it home, we think (no testing available at that time unless hospitalised). Because I was isolated from the rest of the family, I didn't get it, so I'm still here. I am not about to stop shielding either, despite the government "pausing" it, they did so on the bases that cases were going down on the very same day Boris stood up and said "we can't ignore the evidence that cases are going up". I'll trust my own assessment over one that contradicts the facts.

Anyway, the point is that various terrestrial transport operators are clearly stating that they are operating at reduced capacity due to regulations / guidelines, so aviation is not being singled out or treated differently. The fact that some operators may be ignoring the rules or guidelines and running full doesn't mean that those rules and guidelines don't exist. I'm sure there are Ryanairs on road and rail too (TFL...).

Well I am not the one that took that decision. But in order to keep the aircraft flying and bringing people from a to b, there needs to be certain restraints. Then I am wondering what's more important. The 25min turn around or Social distancing? I have flown Ryanair lately and no such thing as disembarking row by row has been done. Also people brought on Board the carry ons. So for the Sake of everyone, it would be nice if Ryanair would change its money making scheme temporarily.

your statement is incorrect or your'e not properly informed on the Italian rules ( that changes very rapidly), cause carry on are allowed. Flown 10 days ago within italy and all of the rules complied with, including disembarking by row; but as we all know, not all passengers in all flights in all airlines are so excited in following rules.

Having travelled both easyJet and Ryanair for some years, easyJet win hands down. Very recently did Stn-Cag, checked in online, allocated a-f for out and return for a party of 6.
Stairs at front and rear both times, Ryanair is the lowest cost carrier and it shows.
2-3 hour flights are generally single aisle anyway; Having travelled business class to Paris with BA pre-covid, all they did was put a tray in the middle seat. Seat pitch was unchanged, worth the extra, hell no, but I wasn't paying.

Disembarking by row is an absolute godsend, reduces the rush to get your (oversized) 'hand' luggage.
Very calm and actually more efficient IMO, what would help is having staff directing passengers to the most appropriate door when boarding, folks with tickets for row 20 should be using rear doors, not walking through from 1 to 20

That's actually how I used to do it (kids grown up now) but I had them sit together next to a stranger, as they would then behave themselves. They would only kick off when sat in a family group with us.