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.'"

Comments

Heap?

[paul248]

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

Re:Heap?

[Skreech]

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.

Not even close

[eln]

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.

Re:Not Faster

[JanneM]

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."

Re:Not Faster

[clem]

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.

Re:They won't go for it?

[Greyfox]

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!

Re:Not Faster

[eosp]

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

Re:Not Faster

[daVinci1980]

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

Re:dual boarding more efficient?

[DNS-and-BIND]

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!

Sure there's a good system

[p3d0]

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.