Slashdot Mirror
Colombian Airline Wants To Make Passengers Stand (yahoo.com)
An anonymous reader writes Budget airline VivaColombia is considering plans to remove all seats from its planes and make passengers stand. They hope the move will drive down fares by allowing them to squeeze more passengers into each flight, opening up air travel to working class Colombians and budget holidaymakers. The no-frills carrier announced last week that it is adding 50 new Airbus 320s to its fleet to capitalise on the country's growing tourist market. The new planes will have more seats and lower running costs with the first one going into service at the start of 2018. VivaColombia's founder and CEO William Shaw told the Miami Herald the airline was looking into vertical travel options. He said: "There are people out there right now researching whether you can fly standing up -- we're very interested in anything that makes travel less expensive." He added: "Who cares if you don't have an inflight entertainment system for a one-hour flight? Who cares that there aren't marble floors... or that you don't get free peanuts?"
Its Indian competitor is going to allow people to stand on TOP of the planes, just like on the trains!
Impressive.
Take Off and Landing sound like adventures.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
I figure this probably breaks one or two little safety rules, though maybe if it's only on domestic flights they don't apply.
I'm certain that if you could get away with it Try-onair would already be doing it.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Actually, I don't think this will be as big of a deal as you'd think, especially for the target demographics (working class folks). These flights are probably intra-national (i.e. Columbian city to another Columbian city) and not an 18 hour long haul across the Pacific.
Anecdotally, I visited Taiwan a few years ago and bought a train ticket from the south to Taipei - about 4 or 5 hours. What I didn't realize was that it was standing room only as I was late in purchasing the ticket.
At first, I was simply flabbergasted that standing on a train for 4 to 5 hours would be considered acceptable in a 1st would nation like Taiwan. It took me about an hour before I even stopped considering getting off at a stop and buying a real ticket later in the day.
It did kind of suck, but I stuck it out and made it, though was somewhat tired and sore.
On the other hand, it didn't look like it phased the locals one bit, and this included both younger and older folks.
The problem with Westerners, and especially Americans, is that we are too fat, out of shape, and not used to any sort of discomfort.
But then again, I suppose they all would have liked to sit and have access to a plug, too. It's just Taiwan is more crowded than the US.
DO A BARREL ROLL!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Now we've got in-flight entertainment!
Super Saver Econo $49.95* New York to Los Angeles
* add a seat with luxurious safety belt for only $449.95
Also, it will be much easier to drag people off flights when its overbooked, without all of those pesky seats and saftey belts in the way.
To this guy, having marble floors and having seats on a flight is the same level of unneeded opulence. Standing on a flight to pack a plane is ridiculous. Affordability should not mean making it a miserable experience. Why not start loading people into coffen size boxes and transport them in a cargo plane? If it's only an hour flight, who cares, right?
The main issue I see with this is whether there will be too much weight to safely take off and fly. Although runway length and air density are factors in whether a plane can safely take off at a particular weight, there is also a maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) that doesn't depend on these factors. If the MTOW is exceeded, it may be unsafe to fly the plane because the structure may be unable to support the load placed on it due to the excessive weight. It's also possible that the plane may be too heavy and, if an engine were to fail during the flight, it might not be able to safely fly. I'm concerned that the added weight of squeezing in more passengers may result in the planes not being able to safely fly. While I support making air travel affordable, it shouldn't be at the expense of safety.
A Jewish-owned airline based in Portugal wants to make passengers lie prostrate stacked on top of eachother?
There are stand up roller coasters which have safety / restraint systems designed to keep riders safe, even when upside down. So from the perspective of keeping passengers in place during flight, it is technically possible. Comfort is of course another matter. If you ever been on a stand up roller coaster, are male, and have had the lower restraint (bicycle seat) set too high, you would fear turbulence on a stand up plane.
Takeoff and landing are probably OK, it's not THAT much more extreme that what you feel on subway or bus.
The problem is going to come when the plane experience major turbulence. Turbulence can be bad enough that the overhead compartments open up and things fall on people. What's going to happen when a plane full of people experience that? People are going to be hurt.
when there's enough turbulence that all of the falling down passengers roll to the back of the plane there wont be enough elevator to lift the tail == doesn't fly
An air-plane needs its centre of mass at defined position (with some small error). The article claims the use of some kind of "vertical seats" to force passengers to stand at their specified position most of the time. It might work. We will see.
Spare us the tales about someone "considering" something. Who the fuck cares about random people in far off lands musing or daydreaming or wishing things?
Want to know why no one trusts the media? Stories like this. Flamebait and clickbait completely disconnected from reality.
I'm not saying I'd be interested in using such an airline, but it seems like it could work if they had standing "rests" that passengers could strap themselves to for safety. I mean, you couldn't have passengers being thrown about the plane in turbulent conditions, so they'd need to be secured in place, the way seat-belted passengers are. Also, to reduce the discomfort of actual standing, the backrests could include small, adjustable "choir seats", just a few inches deep, and adjusted to sit high enough that the passenger's legs are almost straight. The cabin would have to be tall enough to accommodate everyone standing, which might require removal of the overhead luggage compartments.
For short flights, it could be safe enough, and not too uncomfortable, and would allow perhaps 75% more passengers on the plane, which would allow ticket prices to be reduced by about 60% -- a $100 flight for $40, for example. Lots of people would be willing to be less comfortable for an hour to save $60, even in wealthier nations.
It could work, I think.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Instead of being strapped in your seat while the guy next you is bouncing off the ceiling, y'all can do the two step tango all throughout the fuselage.
you break your neck due to turbulence.
Assuming they sort out the safely issues (I mean we stand on busses and trains and subways moving 50mph... my commuter train regularly tops 70mph here in America) yest take off and landing would be a bit sketch if it's setup the way a subway is, but if you take the time and effort to look at the problem from a new way, maybe add some specialized equipment... maybe it still can't be done, but it's certainly worth looking in to.
If it were safe and say, cost half as much, $150 round trip to Seattle from SF at the gate (not buying in advance) vs $350 or even $500 recently, heck yeah I would be willing to stand for two hours!
The elderly and sick, pregnant mothers, and people in wheelchairs would still have priority seating access of course.
moox. for a new generation.
and see how that goes.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
No one kicking your seat back, no one reclining into your lap, no leg cramps, no potential blood clots from long term sitting. Assuming whatever protective harness they put you in isn't all that uncomfortable, I'd be willing to give it a try.
You occupy the same amount of space lying down, but it's a lot more comfortable. I'd actually like to travel on a plane that has bunkbeds on it.
Different but kinda similar thing, I was saying post 9/11, TSA launch, recent Patriot Act passing fear mongering that given enough room, Airlines would start forcing passengers to get a change of clothes pre-flight, absolutely no carry on allowed, then get sedated, and then pille everyone up like luggage inside planes with the excuse of it being for the security of the flight or something.
I guess this one is at least honest about the objective.
People already get extremely packed inside public transportation anyways, so this should be fine, right? Well, that is until you consider how long it takes before and after flight, how you can't exit the plane if the situation becomes too uncomfortable, how you are not running along roads but rather climbing up and going down the skies inside a metal can, how turbulence can be far more dangerous with a pack of people standing up than sitting in a comfortable position, how the last thing you want inside a plane is people panicking and running around, how dangerous scenarios like depressurization, major turbulence, and other types of problems can become catastrophic extremely fast if you have people standing...
It's quite obvious for people who fly frequently... those warning to sit down and fast the seatbelt are out of precaution, but they are there for a reason.
I mean, let this pass and we'll see how it goes. But I'm not going inside one of those, like ever. And I wouldn't invest on the airline behind this. I guarantee you that after not long, the airline would be sued to oblivion.
I doubt their local or the foreign regulatory agencies where they plan on flying to would allow such a configuration.
I'd be fine with allowing airlines to add standing-room-only airplanes on two conditions:
1) Once per flight leg, every passenger is allowed to punch or kick... full force, mind you, not a symbolic little love tap, but no weapons... a single airline employee, without repercussion.
2) No less than once per quarter (Hell, let's do it at earnings call time.) every C-level, president, VP, director, and manager of the airlines must present themselves to the public. There will be no security screenings at the venue. There will be no repercussions for the actions of the public. Vendors will be on-site selling alcoholic beverages, rotten eggs and vegetables, balloons filled with pigs' blood or any other substance that the latex will hold, bricks, and shuriken.
Imagine all the people...
ad absurdum:
"Fly TREBUCHET airways! So anyone can afford a Weekend Fling!
Ryanair, back in 2012, considered standing seats. And Airbus has more than a few patents on various standing (or close to standing) seats. While, in theory, some short haul flights might be viable with standing seats, the regulators usually nix the idea (among other concerns, a plane has to be able to empty in 90 seconds in an emergency, and more people means more exits required) long before the consumer backlash hits (and kiss your overhead stowage goodbye).
and I used to be an airline pilot. I want the cheapest fare possible and have no problem whatsoever with standing for the entire flight. As for the safety aspect, that's easily solved with a backrest that you can strap yourself into. In fact, I think standing plus leaning up against a back rest is more comfortable than those crappy seats they fill the planes with now.
You're gonna go all Sully on the Hudson without all of those flotation devices? C'mom, man.
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
What about the first time they hit some turbulence?
*DING* "Ladies and gentlemen, the Captain has just illuminated the 'Fasten Seatbelt' sign, so we'll all be safe while you bounce around the cabin like rubber balls..."
*DING* "The cabin crew will be passing down the cabin shortly, offering a range of bandages, splints and blood replacement products at very competitive prices..."
This sig left unintentionally blank.
There is an exit limit specified to each aircraft. If its an A320 than that number is 180. You cannot legally put more people in the airplane by making them stand.
Furthermore, since we are dealing with Colombia, there are numerous high altitude airports, and a packed, standing room only airline may very well be beyond the aircraft performance limits.
Hang them by their arm-pits!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8779388.stm
Claim you're eliminating co-pilots.
Claim you're offering adult entertainment on flights.
there was another.... hmmmm what was it?
Oh that's right. Standing room only.
A recipe to ensure your name stays in the headlines for loads of free advertising.
Use more trains. That would reduce demand for flights. And any libertarian worth his salt will tell you that how supply and demand works.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
They should market this as a feature. The new agile way to fly!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Studying and rejecting United's proposed new seating method of knocking customers unconscious and stacking them eight deep.
People here are giving pretty reasonable posts, like you'd have to secure passengers, and so on, but I seem to recall that either Easyjet or Ryanair had some crazy CEO a few years ago who suggested this kind of thing and he was definitely not interested at all in securing passengers.
After writing that, I just checked. Viva Colombia is owned by Ryanair. It all makes sense now. The idea got nowhere in Europe for safety reasons. Let's just say that Latin America in general has a much more, uh, "relaxed" attitude towards aviation safety than would work in the USA, Canada and the EU. I said in general so I'm not saying all Latin American airlines are like that.
mooo
take your standing desk hippie ass and gtfo of airline business
MOO!
How about an hour of extreme torture. Who cares? It's just an hour with no lasting effects. Just stand there, for an hour, with nothing to look at, nothing to see, and only one thing to smell. Try standing in your living room for an hour. Lean up against a wall. For an hour. Don't sit. Don't pace. Don't step.
And without peanuts? Are you high? Have we forgotten the purpose of the peanuts? It's the salt. Salt effectively pauses the digestive system, along with a few other biological systems. It's hundreds of people in one place for an hour.
And I don't want to know what happens to standing people in the event of a crash. Or during turbulence. Or holding a baby. Or to your 3' tall daughter when a 300lbs man falls on top of her.
Provided that someone is willing to stand for a couple of ours, Do they think it will be safe?
Ah, they can cram a few more persons if they ditch the toilet!
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
You mean "LET Passengers Stand", giving them an option to save lots of money. No one is going to force all plane passengers to stand, but this would finally give people the option.
The Vienna Opera House doesn't MAKE people stand, but getting to see a professional opera for €20 is worth standing for three (3!) hours. It makes these tickets accessible to those on a budget. The standing section is always packed, literally.
Speaking of accessible, I don't like the idea that medical conditions could force someone to pay more because they can't stand. Does this get addressed?
The Carthaginians were technologically superior to the romans. The romans captured a carthaginian ship and copied it to build their own ships.
They only won the wars by superior military resources.
In your analogy the romans would be the Russians or the Chinese. I don't think you comprehend what you're advocating. Ahem, gulag, ahem cultural revolution a la Mao.
If you want to oversimplify things and have it down to golden calf/money worshiping vs totalitarianism, by all means point me to the golden calf.
I lived in totalitarianism, have you ?
The barrier is usually high because of tons of regulation. Which the big companies adore.
If the idea is to save costs, at all costs, then the first thing I would do is switch to a plane fleet with flying wing geometry and no passenger windows. Such planes could fit more people, they would have major fuel savings, and they would be far more compatible with standing room passenger compartments.
I've been flying for several decades in various classes of service, and I can't recall any plane that had marble floors. Maybe just a wee bit of idiotic hyperbole? Entertainment systems? They come and go per airline--and on a short flight, nobody cares. Peanuts? Well, I think food service on ultra short flights is a waste of everyone's time. But equating those things to marble floors? Please....
"Who cares if you don't have an inflight entertainment system for a one-hour flight? Who cares that there aren't marble floors... or that you don't get free peanuts?" ---
I would give up all that plus in flight drinks and food for bigger more spacious seats. I personally could never stand while in flight, I get motion sickness standing in the subway(metro). Not to mention inertia. Imagine an accident at 80+ miles an hour. The seat and seat belt are the only thing saving you.
...your passengers shift and the center of gravity on your aircraft moves a couple of feet aft during take-off. Seriously, I've seen sky-diving accidents faulted for exactly this premise.
Nice firm wooden bench so you knew where your ass was when it came time to kiss it goodbye.
And a couple things nearby to grip if turbulence got really bad.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
If we continue this way, we won't get the Enterprise-D. We'll get like a shuttlecraft.
Stupid idea. People don't stay vertical by themselves for long.
Horizontal is the way to go, quadruple bunk-beds is way better, I wouldn't mind lying down for a 1 hour flight, not even for a 24 hour one, better than economy any day.
Yes, Ryan Air did propose much the same this a few years ago, then a couple of years later admitted they had no intention of going ahead with it and it was all to do with seeking publicity.
"we're very interested in anything that makes travel less expensive."
"we're very interested in anything that makes travel more profitable for us."
Bob Newhart's sketch from 1960:
The Grace L. Ferguson Airline (And Storm Door Company)
"We do away with frills and extras. Like seats."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
"Who cares if you don't have an inflight entertainment system for a one-hour flight?"
I don't care if I don't have in-flight entertainment, but I DO care if I don't have a fucking SEAT.
Seriously, who wants to stand for an hour aboard an airplane? And that doesn't count loading, waiting for takeoff, landing, and waiting to deplane. It'l be closer to two hours on your feet, crammed in with a couple of hundred other cranky, sweaty people. What if you get sick or don't feel well? What if you're physically unable to stand for an hour or two?
Does anyone want to do this? Anyone? Didn't think so.
Why not stack the people horizontally with oil on their bodies? Add some sardine perfume to the whole thing.
No, they're not standing up. It's a "vertical travel option".
When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
Upright sitting seats are a luxury. Customers should crawl on all fours and have just enough space to recline, but not enough to sit up. On top of that, there will be multiple levels.
Ryanair had the same idea years ago and it was immediately and clearly rejected by any organization and entity involved in air traffic safety.
Actually I like the idea. This way I could come with a modern portable parachute say Air Pol SK-94 Emergency Parachute: http://www.afeonline.com/shop/...
And I do not like those dorky seats anyway. I never watch movies on idiotic displays inbuilt in seats either. My smartphone has got much better display and headset. I just have to pay to transport those low-quality displays, and someone makes money on it.
This has been predicted by the Indian stand up comedian Johny Lever long back! I heard it in one of his stand ups in 2006. His prediction might have preceded it much further back.
Architects should be forced to live in their own buildings, and airline executives should be forced to travel in their own economy class.
You will be on a flight like this one day.
"No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
"Just think how many people they fit on those slave ships. THAT's where we need to be."
And I'll bet that was a dupe.
Sorry, but I've done the "pick the guy from 3 seats over out of my lap" trick after moderate turbulence once too often to find this even slightly amusing. And I've done the free-fall lifeboat trainer a couple of times (a.k.a the "orange Vomit Comet"). This will reduce costs until the first time they kill 75% of passengers in a landing that should have been "survivable" (10% or less mortality). Then the company will go bankrupt and the injured survivor and next-of-kin can go whistle for compensation.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
I fully agree, don't be afraid.
But don't be surprised, when like me, you get fired for "insubordination" and "being uncooperative".
Systems are very rarely designed nor even intended to facilitate their own improvement, oddly enough.
This is the price many have to pay for upholding their principles and being brave.
But don't be afraid to speak out - if you remain silent, you're an enabler, and you must learn to live with either one of the unfortunate consequences of corporate life.
But telling truth to power has serious consequences - prepare yourself well beforehand.