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

Not Faster

[webmaster404]

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, because of the order everyone would have to stop, let him through, reorganize and then go through. In an ideal situation it would be faster but chaos is quicker then order because order can never truly happen.

Re:Not Faster

[dal20402]

Also, what difference would this truly make? Airports already maximize the number of takeoffs from multiple gates. The plane has no choice but to take off at time X, regardless of how annoying the boarding process is. Any successful implementation of speeding up this process means that everybody waits on the plane longer versus in the seating area at the gate.

Most airlines at most airports (i.e. all airports but jammed nightmares such as LGA, JFK in the evening, or ORD) are not capacity limited. If they can turn around planes quicker, that means more legs per day throughout the system, which translates directly into money. For example, Southwest has been continuously refining its boarding process for quite some time to try to shave minutes off turn time. They are at 25 to 30 minutes at most airports; they would dearly love to get that down to 20.

Even at capacity-limited airports, quicker turn times can get the plane out of the airport more quickly, saving time in the rest of the system. At delay-prone airports, quicker turns can help keep the system on schedule. One delayed major airport, such as EWR for Continental, can screw up an airline's entire network in a real hurry.

In 1998, Boeing introduced the 757-300, a super-stretch variant of the narrowbody 757 we know and love from transcontinental U.S. flights. The plane has the lowest cost per passenger-mile of any large jet in existence. Nevertheless, it didn't sell well. At least some of the operators who rejected it did so because, as a narrowbody with ~45 rows of seats, its turn times were just too long to fit smoothly into a short-haul operation. Instead, because of the turn times, those airlines are operating either smaller 757-200s (UA, AA) or widebodies such as the 767-300 (DL) or Airbus A300 (AA, LH). That's how critical turn times are to airline ops.

Re:Overhead space

[PCM2]

Eh, you're exaggerating.

There is something else working in your favor when it comes to checking bags: Money.

I was once boarding a flight to New York when I was told, arbitrarily at the gate, that I would need to check my smallish bag because there was no more overhead cabin room. "B-but-!" I said. "I'm sorry sir, that's the way it is," they said, grabbing my bag and tying a tag around it. Away went my bag. "You can pick it up at your destination."

What didn't really dawn on me until much later was, how could she possibly know what my destination even WAS? With the hub-and-spoke system airlines use in the U.S., it was foolish of her to assume that my destination was New York. So while American Airlines (yes, let me repeat, the airline in question was American Airlines) promptly delivered my bag to the terminal at JFK airport, I had to leg it to catch my connecting flight to Paris, then to Florence, and then by cab to a remote villa in Tuscany -- to which location American Airlines was then forced to deliver my bag, individually, by driver.

Hey, Lady at the Terminal -- was it worth it? How was your performance report that month? And let's not forget that my bag was damaged when it arrived and my camera was missing, meaning I couldn't take any photos at the wedding I was attending ... nice one, American Airlines!

Seriously ... many incidents like that, and terrorism or no terrorism, some flight attendants are going to exercise discretion when it comes to carry-on bags.