Slashdot Mirror


Strict Order Boarding Would Get Planes in the Sky Faster

electrostatic writes "In a Nature.com oldie-but-goodie, a physicist says he has solved a problem that costs airlines millions every year: what is the quickest way to get passengers aboard an aircraft? Boarding is a serious issue for airlines, particularly those operating short flights that run several times a day, yet boarding times have steadily increased for decades. Back in 2005 Jason Steffen of the Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois said the method used by many airlines to this day is almost the worst. 'The best way to board, according to the researchers, would be a row-by-row, seat-by-seat, strict order. That would mean everyone lines up, row 25 first. I can't imagine fliers will go for that. Next best, they say, would be boarding all the window seats first, followed by those in the aisle. Obviously that's not practical, at least for couples or families traveling together.'"

16 of 880 comments (clear)

  1. Heap? by paul248 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Please line up in a tree and maintain the heap invariant while boarding. Thank you for flying nlogn airlines.

    1. Re:Heap? by Skreech · · Score: 5, Funny

      Is n the distance you're traveling? If so, I think I'll stick with n airlines rather than nlogn airlines.

      n^2 airlines is complete trash though.

  2. Not even close by eln · · Score: 5, Funny

    The fastest way to board is to have the seating area at the airport be a removable replica of the seating area inside the airplane. Then, when the plane arrives, the entire airplane opens up, the seating area (with passengers) is removed with a gigantic crane-like machine, and the new seating area (formerly known as the airport waiting area) is loaded in. The area formerly known as the airplane seating area is then put into place inside the airport, and becomes the new airport waiting area. Voila, the entire boarding process in 2 minutes.

    That's probably the fastest way without resorting to powerful vacuums, but probably not terribly practical. The most practical way would be to build the plane with sufficient space in the aisle to avoid the "fat guy with the large carry-on that clearly doesn't fit into the overhead bin holding everyone up" problem, but they'd never go for that.

    So, maybe a giant vacuum (for disembarking) combined with a giant cannon (for boarding) is the best way. We couldn't guarantee seat assignment this way, of course, but if we encased everyone in foam like the stuff in that car in Demolition Man, it should work with a minimum of injuries.

    The problem with these researchers is they aren't thinking outside the box enough.

  3. Re:Not Faster by JanneM · · Score: 5, Funny

    It would be faster until some guy arrives 5 minutes later then everyone else and has to go through security and get on the plane,... "Sorry Sir, your row already boarded. Please see our Courtesy Office over in Terminal Z about rebooking for a later flight. Quite serious, Sir. Yes Sir, same to you too. No Sir, I do believe that act is anatomically impossible. Sir, you are aware of course that as a human you are mostly water? Now, do you want us to press the point that you have knowingly passed through security while being a liquid container greater than 100ml? No, I did not think so, Sir. Terminal Z? Over there, to the left and doen the hall for oh, twenty minutes or so. Bye Sir."

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
  4. Re:Not Faster by clem · · Score: 5, Funny

    Exactly. This study is taking an assembly-line operations approach to a process involving humans, who might be late, have special needs (e.g. "I can't lift this 300-lb carry-on into the overhead, please help"), have incomplete paperwork; all kinds of variables are at play. The failures of such an approach should be self-evident in real-world scenarios. Of course this is a physicist we're talking about who designed the scheme. He's probably abstracted the passengers as perfect frictionless spheres.
    --
    Your courageous and selfless spelling corrections have made me a better person.
  5. Re:They won't go for it? by Greyfox · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's because in first class you have a lot of stuff to get going. You have to get the complimentary champagne going, the foot massage, and select a random person from coach to be flogged for your amusement. If they waited until last to get seated, that'd take forever!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  6. In Soviet Russia, order is mandated. by MonkeyBoyo · · Score: 4, Funny

    I once flew around the Soviet Union a few years before the fall of the Berlin wall.

    They had a very strictly enforced an order where people in the back of the jet got on last and got off first.

    It seems that on at least some Aeroflot models, if you didn't have enough passengers in the front balancing the weight of those in the rear, the plane would tip backwards.

  7. Re:Not Faster by eosp · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well if you smear butter on them, then most Americans will be close to frictionless spheres.

  8. Bad Boarder Corral by 80's+Greg · · Score: 4, Funny

    The worst are people that cram around the boarding area and / or try to board when it's not their turn. Sometimes these people get waved through, but sometimes not. And if they don't get turned around to wait for their turn they end up blocking the people that could be getting seated in the back of the plane.

    I always thought it would be great to have sort of a "bad boarder" or detention area to corral people off to the side of the gate that tried boarding at the wrong time. Just a nice little waiting area that they direct you to stand in and wait. And then once the entire plane has boarded you and all your non-boarding in time friends can join. And then everyone could give them a nice Nelson-style "Hah hah" laugh as they walked bye.

    --
    I gotta have more cowbell.
  9. Re:Not Faster by daVinci1980 · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's too bad slashdot doesn't have a 'sad but true' moderation.

    --
    I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
  10. No that's not American at all by OrangeTide · · Score: 4, Funny

    Europeans might use real butter. In America we would have used artificially flavored oil like the kind we cherish on our movie popcorn. There would be no way to stop passengers from just licking the delicious oil off though.

    I think more efficient would be to just tranquilize all passengers and quickly have them sorted and loaded into the plane like luggage.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  11. Re:dual boarding more efficient? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Funny
    if you[sic] neighbor in line has a higher number you will let them go in front of you.

    That stewardess just re-invented the bubble sort!

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  12. Re:No carry ons... by CmdrGravy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Jesus that's way too much stuff, I went on a 6 month holiday to Australia and all I took was a small mirror, some flints and some coloured beads. I bought the knife when I arrived.

  13. Re:No carry ons... by pipatron · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well I just hitchhiked through the galaxy and all I had was this towel I found on a spaceship.

    --
    c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
  14. Sure there's a good system by p3d0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    There really is no good system. Sure there is. You just have to open the whole side of the plane and let everyone sit simultaneously, as shown in this photo.
    --
    Patrick Doyle
    I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  15. Re:Not Faster by illegalcortex · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's a horrible attitude. You're going to need us fatties in case the plane crashes in the mountains and you have to resort to cannibalism.