Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not only are people bigger, they squeeze in more seats across.
I remember for years Boeing 777 coach was double aisle 9 seats across in a 3-3-3 configuration. Recently I've noticed more and more with 10 seats in a 3-4-3, including on airlines I've regularly flown on that used to be 3-3-3. I seriously doubt anyone went and added interior cabin width to the design of that plane, they upgrade them with different lengths, wings, engines, etc. but not the width.
We don't need larger seats, I travel at least twice a month, often connecting flights, and this has happened twice in the year so I don't think it's a huge (no pun intended) issue to redesign planes over. (I hope they get rid of recline first).
That's mainly travel in Canada, not sure if we're smaller
We have mixed reviews on that. Spirit is trying it with its Big Front Seat, and it seems to be going over well. But in the past we had airlines that offered fist-class seating width in all seats (remember Midwest Airlines, anyone?), and they went bankrupt.
Of course American Airlines had a "more room throughout Coach" approach in the past which famously flopped, but selling Economy Plus seats with extra legroom seems to be working for the legacy airlines now. Maybe we've finally achieved a level of discomfort in coach class that is so apparent to everyone that a significant percentage of the passengers are finally willing to open their wallet a bit wider and pay a reasonable fee for more space?
Yes, I remember the AA fiasco. The problem is that most people choose the lowest price and when AA added legroom, they obviously had to increase the price.
Another example is first class seats. They are only full due to frequent flyers getting free upgrades. Without that, they would be mostly empty because people (and employers) by and large do not want to pay extra.
Well, this is a sweet suggestion but you have underestimated the selfishness and self-absorption of some people. There are a LOT of people who would 'self identify' as overweight if it meant they got a free extra seat beside them. I can imagine entire planes where half the seats are being given 'free' to ver weight people.
Hell, I'd probably do it myself.
That's why the Southwest system works well. Charge for the second seat, and refund the price after the trip. It's more effort than most are willing to spend unless they really need it.
That's why the Southwest system works well. Charge for the second seat, and refund the price after the trip. It's more effort than most are willing to spend unless they really need it.
The Southwest system also works well because of Southwest's lack of assigned seating. There's no need to tweak computer systems to tie the two reservations together to assure the two purchased seats are side-by-side. That makes it easy for the customer to order the extra seat online using Southwest's regular reservation system - no need to call an agent and pay an phone ticketing fee. The customer buys two tickets ( John Smith and John XS Smith), gets two boarding passes, and then gets his two seats. If necessary, another passenger can be moved to accommodate (none of this "I PAID for seat 17J, and you CAN'T move me!" business).
Having assigned seating complicates matters, but you'd think the legacy airlines could find some way of adopting most of Southwest's system. It would make everyone happier.
Sort of an aside, but the problem is not the width at your rear end, it's the shoulder width. I am fairly petite. Whenever I fly, I am always crowded out by guys who sit next to me. People, especially men, are actually wider at the shoulder than they are in the hips. So you could have a very fit man of average weight who fits in the seat, but his shoulders will encroach on the seat next to him. ...
Thank you for pointing this out!
How many adult human males measure less than 17" across the shoulders? That's how many would fit in 17"-width seats, without crowding into neighbors' space. Recently I flew in a CRJ regional jet, with four seats across; there was no first-class compartment. In a window seat, I literally had to rotate my torso to a 45-degree angle to fit into the space between my neighbor's shoulder and the cabin wall. Fortunately it was a short flight.
really? But I thought normal people should have a BMI under 25. You can't demand airliners to satisfy the 2% outliners.
I don't want airliners to offer wider seats overall because the airfare would need to rise. And I really don't need that extra 2 inches of seat if I have to pay for that.
Maybe the solution should be to have 20% of economy seats to be wider so that whoever need/want more space may have it, at addition cost of course. A fat person who can't fit the small seat would be required to pay for the bigger ones, so that 100lbs girls don't have to pay more just because some people choose to have a 45 inch waist.
The bottom line is, overweight people are not entitled to have larger space on board for free or subsidized by regular sized passengers.
Airlines are not even satisfying the 98%, with their compressed seats, baggage fees, inflated pricing, and price categories PER SEAT. Airfare is going to rise no matter what, so at least make all the passengers comfortable, including those who need special accommodations (elderly, obese, etc...). THIS is the bottom line.
Make the seats more comfortable for everyone, even if it means designing special seats for gigantic people. An obese person may have a medical condition which makes them that way. It's not right to assume that all obese people lack discipline to control their weight, so they should be penalized and charged more. This is absurd.
Trying to maximize profit is no excuse for the crap seating, price gouging, and fee structure hell, that airlines are subjecting all passengers to. It's ridiculous.
Having assigned seating complicates matters, but you'd think the legacy airlines could find some way of adopting most of Southwest's system. It would make everyone happier.
Not me. I avoid Southwest like the plague. I much prefer assigned seating.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Airfare is going to rise no matter what, so at least make all the passengers comfortable, including those who need special accommodations (elderly, obese, etc...). THIS is the bottom line.
