Airlines Won't Dare Use the Fastest Way to Board Planes (wired.com)

An anonymous reader writes: You've arrived at the airport early. You have already selected the perfect seat. You've employed all possible tricks for making the check-in and security processes zoom by. But there's still some blood-pressure-raising chaos you can't avoid: boarding. From impatient fellow travelers who are determined to beat you onto the plane to passengers who insist on jamming their too-big carry-ons into overhead bins, making your way to your seat can be straight-up hellish -- and Wired's Alex Davies offers up a cheery explanation of why the situation is unlikely to improve any time soon. It's not that airlines aren't trying. In fact, United is in the middle of a months-long test at LAX that involves splitting its five groups of passengers into two lines, instead of five, to see whether that will make boarding less painful. But there are some basic measures that airlines could be taking to speed things up -- offering free baggage check, for instance, or cutting down on early boarding perks -- if they weren't so worried about their bottom lines. "The question for the airlines, then, is not how to get everyone onto a plane as quickly as possible," Davies writes. "It's how to get everyone onto a plane as quickly as possible while still charging them extra for bags, doting on the regular customers, and maintaining the system that, like all class structures, serves whoever built it."

Comments

Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Back to front, windows to aisle, and actually enforce carry on size.

Kind of hard to sell upgrades then, though.

Re:Always been fucky.

[bradley13]

"Back to front, windows to aisle, and actually enforce carry on size."

And don't let idiots stop halfway to their seat, to stuff their carry-ons into someone else's space.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Oswald McWeany]

Back to front, windows to aisle, and actually enforce carry on size.

Kind of hard to sell upgrades then, though.

Exactly, boarding from front to back, as they do it now, is actually the worst way to do it. It causes blockages. The back should board first and the front should exit first. That's the most logical approach. Of course they don't want their precious first class people waiting longer though so they board first despite that being the slowest, most inconvenient way to board.

Re:Always been fucky.

[religionofpeas]

If they'd enforce carry on size, there would be no reason to put it somewhere else.

Re:Always been fucky.

[TWX]

Not true, they do not size the overhead baggage compartments to the number of seats entirely correctly.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Easy fix - put First Class at the back.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Aighearach]

And even if they did, the size requirements are generally per airline, not per aircraft model, and they don't all have the same size overhead compartments. There would have to be an international standard size that all the airlines agreed to for it to work, and it would still be another 10-15 years before the luggage sizes had standardized to match and the average traveler had compliant bags.

But nobody would even agree to the standard, all the airlines value their ability to endlessly twiddle these policies back and forth.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Oswald McWeany]

Easy fix - put First Class at the back.

Then first class would be next to the toilets and last to get off... that would upset first class even more.

Re:Always been fucky.

[TWX]

So do what I've wanted them to do for ages.. Give their first-class passengers free access to the swanky private lounges that they maintain, give them one or two free drink coupons for the privilege, and then have the gate agent come get them when it's time to board first-class. In the meantime keep the overhead bins in first-class closed so that people flying coach don't stuff their baggage in there on their way through.

Wife used to fly a lot for work and had a membership to the US Airways Club. It was nice. Free snacks and non-alcoholic drinks, reasonably-priced alcoholic drinks. Well insulated from noise. Interior decor comfortable, and good choices to minimize sound carrying from others in the lounge. Tons of electrical and even some with data jacks back from before Wifi was ubiquitous, plus better wifi than the airport has. Work cubicle areas for those who need to conduct business while they wait during a layover without causing a disturbance. Free magazines, and I don't just mean the crappy skymall stuff.

If a first-class ticket meant getting free admissions to the private lounges and the perks therein, it would be a lot more desirable to pay those prices.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Oswald McWeany]

Not true, they do not size the overhead baggage compartments to the number of seats entirely correctly.

Oh... the overhead baggage compartments are correct to the number of seats INTENDED for the aircraft. It's just they crammed extra seats in relative to how the plane was initially intended and didn't increase storage space.

Re:Always been fucky.

[PolygamousRanchKid]

And don't let idiots stop halfway to their seat, to stuff their carry-ons into someone else's space.

Assign the overhead space to the seats below it. If your bags don't fit in the space assigned to you, the airline can charge you extra, and keep them happy juicing their customers.

Of course, that would lead to reduced space utilization. But it might encourage folks to check bags that are too big and obscenely cry to be checked.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Back to front, windows to aisle, and actually enforce carry on size."

And don't let idiots stop halfway to their seat, to stuff their carry-ons into someone else's space.

Grab that fucker's bag and gate-check it as yours.

Re:Always been fucky.

[TWX]

It also doesn't help that the official standard (or as official as that thing sitting at the ticket counter is) doesn't really match the form-factor of the bin either. We have a couple of bags that are thicker than the official standard but when placed in the overhead bin with the handle toward the outside of the plane, wheels toward the hatch and down, fit with enough room for a hat or a coat to be stuffed in on top. Once we were forced to gate-check these bags even though they fit the official width and height, just not the thickness, but they have fit easily in previous airplanes of the same series before.

The problem that I saw most were people with suitcases that when wheels-down were too tall, so they are too long and would prevent the door from closing, so they turn them sideways.

Re:Always been fucky.

[bigdady92]

or get an American Express Platinum card which gives you all those benefits for nothing.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like an improvement to me.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't threaten me with a good time!

Re:Always been fucky.

[Nutria]

The back should board first and the front should exit first. That's the most logical approach.

I don't know if SWA still does it like that, but they did it in the 1990s, and it was a dream.

Re:Always been fucky.

[bondsbw]

I can agree with this so long as additional allowed items (such as medical equipment) are exempted.

Re:Always been fucky.

[TWX]

Except being summoned by the gate agent when it's time to board your flight after everyone else has already boarded, and where there's still room in the overhead bin...

Re:Always been fucky.

[gfxguy]

AMEX Platinum doesn't have a yearly fee?

Re:Always been fucky.

[ender-]

To my knowledge, SWA has never done this. They have always done a 'first come first serve' kind of thing. Whoever checks-in first, gets to board first and pick whatever seat they want.

Re:Always been fucky.

[silas_moeckel]

Try that flying with children, does not work well.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Obfuscant]

and then have the gate agent come get them when it's time to board first-class.

That will cost money and waste time. People near the gate can get to the gate sooner than people in a lounge halfway across the airport. Having to dedicate a person to go get them means higher costs.

In the meantime keep the overhead bins in first-class closed so that people flying coach don't stuff their baggage in there on their way through.

Interestingly enough, knowing how to open an overhead bin is a pretty common bit of information that most flyers have. They sometimes have to do it when they deplane, and just watching someone else do it is usually enough to figure out how.

What I'm trying to say is, you can close the overhead bins, but people passing by who fear not having space where they are will simply open them up and put their stuff in. I've seen them do it to closed bins in economy as they pass by, so why you'd think they wouldn't do it to an apparently empty first class section is interesting.

You could have a waitress, I mean FA, standing there to stop them, but then she's not doing anything productive like getting the aircraft ready for departure or helping people who actually need help boarding.

If a first-class ticket meant getting free admissions to the private lounges and the perks therein, it would be a lot more desirable to pay those prices.

At least for United, most of the people in First are not paying for first class tickets. They are complimentary upgrades for Mileage Plus fliers. On many many flights I've been on, maybe two out of a dozen seats are actual first class tickets. What you'd wind up with is a system where first class paying passengers are the last people on the plane and having to search for overhead space, and those people are the LAST ones you want to piss off. Not only are they paying extra for their seats, they're usually frequent fliers who pay extra more often.

The perks work, so they will stay. I've flown United my entire career, except for a number of times I can count on the fingers of one hand. Every one of those exceptions has been a horrible flight where the airline has had no reason to treat me better than "get on last, get a middle seat" mode. (Except one flight on a government travel order.) I have no reason to switch to any other airline, despite how United sometimes screws things up really bad. (No heat on a winter flight on an Express flight, for example.)

And finally, First is not the holdup when boarding. Yes, there is an initial hiccup as they find seats and put bags away, but from then on the delays come from the many more people getting on in back. You would not speed things up significantly by making first board last.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Then just board first class back to front first. After them, coach back to front. Win win.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, expirements have shown that back-to-front boarding is NOT the fastest. In simple terms, Window, then middle, then Isle seat boarding is acutally faster than back-to-front.

This is why experimentation is so important to overcome individuals misguided common-sense.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of the airlines did it this way in the 90's. I had family that worked for 40+ years for united (started with the mini skirts and pill-box hats, used to serve hot meals to coach on any 2+ hour flight) that worked through the transition from "smart" to "completely ass backwards" ways of handling customers by the airlines.

Alot of procedures have been intentionally made worse for profit-seeking activity. Don't buy the whole "it'll raise the cost of tickets too much" BS. Any savings is *never* passed to the customer. The fact that you no longer get a free, hot-plate lunch doesn't reduce your ticket cost, it just means more profit.

The fact that *all* the airlines do things like this, nearly in sync, is hilariously obvious red-flag that there isn't really competition within the major, back-bone airlines in the US. How do you argue for a Trust-Bust when the trusts are a few nominally-competitive entities?

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh...you saw me do that? hehe

Re:Always been fucky.

[JaredOfEuropa]

Also: just charge for luggage by the kg / lb over whatever allowance you choose to set, whether it's hold or cabin baggage, including that "reasonable amount of reading matter for the flight". That way most people will no longer bother cramming as much stuff as possible into their cabin bag.

Also: enforce boarding order. It's adoring to see staff call the first set of passengers - the ones with seats at the rear - forward to board, then notice a somewhat larger than expected stampede. So you board the plane with the second group expecting a clear path to your seats, but finding people already blocking pretty much the length of the aisle, taking their sweet time to load their stuff in the overhead lockers. Tasering's too good for them.

Re:Always been fucky.

[imidan]

When I'm getting on a plane, most of the time I'm waiting is because people ahead of me are wasting time trying to cram their massive luggage into the overhead bin or are getting out of their seats into the aisle to let in someone who is sitting farther outboard.

Someone above said 'enforce carry on size'. I think we can go one further and reduce carry-on size. We have a mad rush to get on the plane because people want to get overhead bin space for their huge roller bag before everyone else fills it up with their own huge roller bags. If there was no shortage of space, people may not be in such a hurry to get on the plane. We all depart and arrive at the same time.

Divide the volume of overhead bin space by the passenger capacity of the plane and limit bag size so everyone gets room. Then we can board back to front, windows to aisle, without anyone freaking out? You can still seat first class first, it doesn't take long compared to seating coach.

But what about families? You can't send in the two kids who have the window and middle seats before the mom who has the aisle. And disabled people? You can't send the half-daffy grandpa in separate from his helper. If too many exceptions crop up, we spoil the efficiency of the process.

Re:Always been fucky.

[ShanghaiBill]

Sounds like an improvement to me.

Be careful what you wish for. The first class passengers are subsidizing your ticket prices. If fewer people fly FC, you will pay more.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, so my 6 year old daughter boards 80 places ahead of me in line, because she's in the window seat and I'm in the middle?

It's always so easy to insist on simplistic solutions and calling others idiots.......

Re:Always been fucky.

[aaarrrgggh]

No, the easy fix is to board via a Door 2 like most 757's are done. First turns left, economy turns right. The perk is maintained for first class, and late first class boarders do not impact the remainder of boarding; the flight attendants also have proper access for pre-flight coddling.

The reason this isn't done on newer planes is they eliminate the door to maximize flexibility in first class cabin size.

The *fastest* way to board is with both front and rear doors via jet bridges. This isn't done because the incremental benefit in time saved does not offset the additional cost or complexity. Maybe what they should do is have the "basic economy" passengers (who are not allowed carry-ons that won't fit under the seat) board via a scissors-lift catering van at the back of the plane. Maybe add to the discount if they work a shift for the catering company first and "check in" at that depot.

Personally, I wouldn't pay for first class if it didn't give priority boarding. I want my decompression time prior to the flight.

Re:Always been fucky.

[fplant]

Actually, the random unassigned seating method that Southwest uses is the fastest.

Unfortunately other airlines will never do that because they have to get rid of all their perk levels.

Re:Always been fucky.

[bws111]

This is so wrong it is funny. Yes, the 'traditional' airlines used to have free luggage, and meals, blah blah blah. Then 'discount' airlines, like JetBlue, came along and at the same time online booking made it MUCH easier to shop on price. The discount airlines started taking significant business away from the the traditionals. So in order to COMPETE (oddly, the exact opposite of your claim), the traditional airlines had to find ways to lower prices, and they did. To say that these changes have not resulted in lower prices is the height of stupidity.

Re:Always been fucky.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

What? One small revenge people can still take against the 1%ters is to fart as they go through first class. Want to take that away too? Elitist!

Re:Always been fucky.

[mrun4982]

Back to front is not much better because it's still a serial process (i.e. one person loading their luggage and sitting at a time). The best way is when you can get multiple people loading their luggage in the overheads and sitting at once. That means loading people from throughout the plane at once. The best way to get that to happen is to not assign seats. Southwest's way is by far the best way to load an airplane.

Re:Always been fucky.

[ShanghaiBill]

Pro-tip: Use a soft bag, and put a smaller hard case inside it for the items that need to be protected.

Also, I was in the military, and here is the proper way to load and unload a plane (or bus):
1. Put a gunnery sergeant at the front of the vessel to control the process.
2. Load back-to-front BY COLUMN. So window seats load first, back-to-front, then middle seats, then aisle seats.
3. Unload the same way: Everyone in an aisle seat on the starboard side stands up, grabs their gear and files off. Then the port side aisle. Then the starboard middle seats, etc. An entire column of passengers is getting their gear simultaneously, adding massive parallelism to the process.
4. Anyone who bottlenecks the system get assigned to latrine cleaning duty.

Re:Always been fucky.

[postbigbang]

This is what we've been reduced to, that is, groveling over seeming "small favors" like ok, bring your CPAP, or your CGM, cane, walker, etc. Musicians can bring instruments (sometimes).

We're GROVELING for space that we should have anyway, just so airlines can please Wall Street, NOT THEIR PAYING PASSENGERS.

There are no longer clothes closets for coats. The food was never much good. The seat pitch is made for anorexics. And people, believing they're getting a "deal" (notice there are no such things as bereavement fares and the like) will swallow any humiliation no matter how undignified or simply crazy.

You have to have your naked image taken, remove very reasonable items from luggage, ensure your Papers Are In Order, then queue in to lines that are grievously long. We're like cows to slaughter.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Max_W]

The back should board first...

If one types in a search engine: aircraft tail sitting, and sees the images, it would become clear that it is not a good idea.

Aircraft is not a bus. The common sense does not always work in aviation.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly - in fact I'd go a step further.
Make the waiting area the same seat configuration as the plane, and get people to sit in the right place in the waiting area.
When it's boarding time, board people in the waiting area from back to front, window to aisle.
Anyone not seated in the correct waiting area seats boards, will be processed after everyone else.
If not enough people are using the waiting area, subsidize using the area with a free in flight meal/beverage/whatever.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Easy fix - put First Class at the back.

Then first class would be next to the toilets and last to get off... that would upset first class even more.

Comfort lies next to the plane's center of gravity. The tail passengers are those who feel the shaking.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Lol. No. There are plenty of airliners that fly plenty profitably without first class. Actually sort a list of airlines by % first class. First class % is probably inversely correlated to profitability.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Alypius]

The fee is waived for active-duty military

Re:Always been fucky.

[MichaelSmith]

I believe the crew bags are a standard size and are stored in slots which only work for those bags. The idea could be extended to passenger bags too.

Re:Always been fucky.

[hawguy]

Assign the overhead space to the seats below it. If your bags don't fit in the space assigned to you, the airline can charge you extra, and keep them happy juicing their customers.

Of course, that would lead to reduced space utilization. But it might encourage folks to check bags that are too big and obscenely cry to be checked.

Seems like that's just going to make things worse as many more bags need to travel upstream from the rear of the plane up front where they can be gate checked... and kind of silly to do that since as the bag travels foward, it's going to pass up empty bins from passengers that didn't use their assigned space.

You must work for the airlines, you've come up with a solution that's going to make the problem worse while also charging customers more.

Re:Always been fucky.

[mapkinase]

First class has never been a problem in my life. By the time they allow economy in, first class is already seated and enjoy their Safeway zinfandel.

Actually I never had a problem boarding except in some routes where the shit countries are.

Re:Always been fucky.

[lgw]

Ha, you peasants think you're smart, but I've already angled my air vent so that he who dealt it smelt it.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, expirements have shown that back-to-front boarding is NOT the fastest. In simple terms, Window, then middle, then Isle seat boarding is acutally faster than back-to-front.

In simpler terms, window, then middle, then isle, all back-to-front.

*and they really should separate fat people from the normal, elegant and beautiful ones. Bryan Ferry shouldn't be seating beside Jojo Todynho.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Nutria]

Exactly. And the ones that couldn't compete died.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

That system would need some adaptation to be viable for commercial aviation. For example, people traveling with children aren't going to be thrilled with boarding separately from those children.

Re:Always been fucky.

[TWX]

Neither will anyone else boarding in the adjacent rows.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

When I bought my "carry on" luggage is came with $1 million guarantee that it was acceptable carry-on size. So if an airline rejects it based on size I can go on vacation for a while ...

Re:Always been fucky.

[jbr439]

The problem with this is that you'd separate parents from kids. So, not gonna happen.

Re: Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not true (at least not for all airlines). I flew American Airlines last week, one of the crew bags was stuffed in the regular bin above my seat next to my own carry-on. It was also in all respects the same as any ordinary luggage except that it had CREW printed in big letters on all sides.

Re:Always been fucky.

[CWCheese]

If you choose to fly out of and in to Burbank Airport using Southwest, you'll enjoy the boarding of both front and rear doors. It is such a pleasure to walk across the tarmac toward the tail of the aircraft whilst nearly everyone else is crowding up the front stairs.

Re:Always been fucky.

[CWCheese]

True, SW has always done a first come first served approach. I recall when they were still using the plastic number cards 3 decades ago, when I'd try to be among first in line to get a card in the first 30. Now they do it online with check-in precisely 24 hours before flight, but the first 16 are reserved for those who will buy business select. They also implemented A-list priority if you pay $15 each way to let the system automatically check you in rather than waiting to click the check-in button on your browser. That is the only extra fee I pay to fly SW, it's still cheaper than the other airlines fares.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Last I checked, unless people are crawling over seats, moving thru an aisle (or aisles in wide-bodies) is still a serial process.

Re:Always been fucky.

[ender-]

I also miss the seats they had that faced each other. I'd get there early to get early boarding, then sit in one of those aisles and prop my feet up so nobody would sit there. Super selfish, I'll admit, but as long as the flight wasn't full, I got lots of extra leg room.

Re:Always been fucky.

[rwa2]

Eh, first class is already next to the fwd toilets. Not sure why they're in such a hurry to board first and leave the relative comfort of the terminal lounge to spend an extra 20 minutes packed in the tin can while everyone else and their dog parades past them coughing and stuff. But hey, who am I to understand first class privilege?

Re:Always been fucky.

[Kjella]

Exactly, boarding from front to back, as they do it now, is actually the worst way to do it. It causes blockages. The back should board first and the front should exit first. That's the most logical approach. Of course they don't want their precious first class people waiting longer though so they board first despite that being the slowest, most inconvenient way to board.

Well I can't speak for first class but I can speak for the business class... if you're doing 100+ flights a year as I did at least one year you got everything worked out in fine detail. It's within size and weight regulations because you don't want the hassle. You keep your liquids and laptop near the zipper to easily extract and return it and they're within limits too. You know every metal object you're carrying and if the scanner beeps it for a random check. You place your hand luggage in the overhead compartment and step aside. Approximately every major delay I've seen has been a.. (thinking of a polite term) less than experienced traveler who's clearly on his once-a-year vacation trip or with rugrats that can't behave.

It even went so far that I had a security guard comment out loud "Perfect technique" and while a bit flummoxed I did manage to answer "Practice makes perfect". But of course I did look as I've done this a thousand times the last decade and... it was probably close. While the "perks" of early entry and early exit are quite questionable, trust me we're not the enemy. We just don't want to get stuck behind the 1% of the "regular" passengers who don't have any social antennas and realize (s)he's blocking a plane full of people. And well, if you're going on your once-a-year vacation you can afford to be there two hours early. Me, I've spent enough time in the airport lounge that felt like a chore. It's not a perk, it's a poor substitute for being home.

Re:Always been fucky.

[rwa2]

Alaska Airlines and a few others I've flown always arrange boarding groups from the back to the front (well, after letting disabled, families with small children, and first class board).

Logical policymakers are out there... somewhere...

Re:Always been fucky.

[david_thornley]

Reducing the size of carry-ons is going to be REAL unpopular. Companies make bags that are just sized for carry-ons, Travelers have bought them. Travelers are used to packing them. Travelers are going to be really pissed if you say, "No, for this flight it has to be three inches shorter."

Re:Always been fucky.

[ShanghaiBill]

people traveling with children aren't going to be thrilled with boarding separately from those children.

Passengers with kids could pre-board or post-board. If 10% have kids, you would still get 90% of the speedup by column loading.

Re:Always been fucky.

[ceoyoyo]

I've never understood why first class want to get on first. I fly a lot, and occasionally I accidentally demonstrate enough loyalty that I get to preboard. Yuck. Lounge in the... lounge with power and wifi until the last two people are in line to board, then stroll over and walk on. Sit down, plane leaves.

Re:Always been fucky.

[slashdot_commentator]

Most airlines only focus on purchasing one or two models with their air fleet. There's compartment variation between manufacturers, but there shouldn't be that much amongst the same manufacturer. Dumbass airlines should just have a maximal set measurement for carry-on baggage, and if it doesn't meet (laser measurement) inspection at check-in, the passenger has to put it in cargo (with requisite bag limits & charges). If they don't want to pay the extra fees, pound sand and find a different airline.

Re:Always been fucky.

[slashdot_commentator]

Aren't there a shortage of gunnery sergeants and equivalent in the US military?

Re: Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

great ifea, but this would NEVER work for civis

Re:Always been fucky.

[thegarbz]

2. Load back-to-front BY COLUMN.

Yeah great idea. Split up families with small kids, partners who put things into each other's bags. Please don't apply military knowledge to common civilian situations. It often does not end well.

Re:Always been fucky.

[thegarbz]

Of course they don't want their precious first class people waiting longer

A plane which offers first class would never cause that class of people to block the commoners getting on. They are completely segregated for a reason.

Re: Always been fucky.

[kenh]

Pretty certain that IS a standard, at least in the US. I bought a pelican case that was billed as matching airline standard for size, and lo and behold, it slipped right in no problem.

The problem is people find the standard too small, so they get bags they think will fit overhead, then forced the issue.

I was surprised how easy the pelican case slid in to the overhead compartment, and fit perfectly.

Re: Always been fucky.

[kenh]

My proposal is that only "carry-on" bags go overhead, anything else can be pulled and put under the seat in front of you.

At 2m tall, I check my bag, and only carry a laptop/messenger bag and cost - I need every inch under the seat in front of me for my feet.

I agree with others that wish airlines would enforce carry-on policies, but I think the airlines let most carry-on rules slide because it reduces complaints about checked baggage fees, the most profitable thing they offer.

Re: Always been fucky.

[kenh]

We can board in a logical order, and still allow adults flying with small children to board first, along with the elderly and folks in wheelchairs...

Re: Always been fucky.

[kenh]

First class passengers can board anytime like, those that choose to board first get to watch every other passenger hump their carry on bags long-time to the back of the plane. The few times I've flown first class i boarded last - what's the rush, my state's reserved and I don't do 'carry on'.

Re:Always been fucky.

[belg4mit]

You cannot stand to be away from your partner for the three or four minutes this would take?!

As for kids, an eight year old could navigate this just fine, they line up everyday at school and file in to assigned seats in their classrooms.

Parents with wee ones could get on first, last, or be restricted to a range of seats that load in some other way.

Re:Always been fucky.

[LynnwoodRooster]

Guaranteed overhead storage for my solitary bag. I've boarded near the end of the queue before for my first class seat (I fly a lot, around 295,000 miles last year and 3+ flights a week, and though I rarely pay for first/business I am almost always bumped up - the "bonus" for being a permanent Diamond medallion on Delta), and when I got on all the overheads for first class were filled. Thankfully the flight attendant stashed my bag with the crew storage.I have seen first class passengers who waited until the end having their bags gate checked - and they were NOT happy.

FWIW, I use an Everki Titan backpack for everything, every trip - even a two week blitz around Asia just last month. People need to realize that most places around the world can do laundry and have basic amenities and pharmacies, so bringing more than 3 changes of clothes is a bit crazy, and there's no need to bring every salve-under-the-sun with you, when if you need the rare tube of Neosporin you can buy it locally.

Re:Always been fucky.

[LynnwoodRooster]

As a frequent flier (Delta diamond medallion - permanent - and 3+ flights a week on average), I can tell you that probably 80% of those roll-on bags are NOT sized for carry-ons, they are too big. I use an Everki Titan backpack, and it just barely makes the list. Most luggage does not. Add in the popular "hack" of bringing a roller bag AND a full-size backpack (or both AND a purse), and then stuffing all of them in the bins, and a single person just took up the overhead space for 3 people.

Re: Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's probably valid for the one airport which has ridiculous carry on size. Most carry on luggage does not meet with the individual airline sizing guides, but they are too weak to enforce it.

Re:Always been fucky.

[LynnwoodRooster]

Kudos to you! Just a little thought ahead of the game helps it out. I don't know how many times I've seen people in the security line have to back through because they forgot their cell phone in their pocket. And some of these folks I see nearly every week on the regular flight to SFO! They STILL haven't learned to prepare ahead of time...

Re:Always been fucky.

[LynnwoodRooster]

I fly a lot, and occasionally I accidentally demonstrate enough loyalty that I get to preboard.

The first part of that statement does not match the second part of that statement.

Re: Always been fucky.

[shilly]

It's as though people don't read the article. The point is, airlines aren't trying to optimise for speed alone; they balance speed against other factors including profitability, which means providing priority boarding options for a fee (eg flying club or sometimes a straight-up fee).

Re:Always been fucky.

[shilly]

That's because US domestic "first class" is nothing of the sort. International first class means you turn left, not right. So you get to board first, but once you're onboard and are getting seated, the process doesn't block the economy passengers from boarding.

Re:Always been fucky.

[bingoUV]

"Cannot stand" and "would not like" are different.

Remember who is paying.

Re:Always been fucky.

[WorBlux]

There's a pretty easy adaptation. If ticket were purchased together and are adjacent seats, they load together.

Re:Always been fucky.

[WorBlux]

That explains a lot acutally.

Re:Always been fucky.

[WorBlux]

Not actually true, even on a sq. footage basis. Business class is, as it's denser and more likely to be booked closer to departure when ticket prices are higher.

Re:Always been fucky.

[thegarbz]

Again don't assume military rules apply. People can't even follow simple rules like group loading or not standing in the priority lane. Do you honestly thing the hordes would cope with not only column based loading, but then also exceptions to the rule?

Re:Always been fucky.

[thegarbz]

You cannot stand to be away from your partner for the three or four minutes this would take?!

Nope you missed the point. It's not the separation from the partner it's the access to a potential combined bag.

As for kids could navigate just fine. You could have just said you don't have kids. It would have been shorter to write.

Oh and good now you also added exceptions to the rule. How about we just go all out and write a 10 page manual on how to board a plane. I mean people have shown they're not even able to cope with the simple system of priority. The airports that use group based loading already turn the queue into a clusterfuck, let's just make it even more complicated!

Don't apply military knowledge to common civilian situations. If often does not end well.

Re:Always been fucky.

[SamTombs]

Because the first class seats are more comfortable than the seats in the terminal, and the drinks are free while the peons file into their steerage class seats.

Re: Always been fucky.

[cthulhu11]

Lots of people when they travel donâ(TM)t want to blow a day sitting in a laundromat.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Vastad]

Passengers with kids could pre-board or post-board. If 10% have kids, you would still get 90% of the speedup by column loading.

Even if you do that....*sigh*

SAS, British Airways and Singapore Airlines were the last 3 airlines I flew with. All 3 announced that passengers with children could board first along with the "Silver" or "Gold" passengers.

You know what?

At least half the family groups that qualified (toddlers, 5 year olds) in all three waiting lounges did not take advantage of this. They lined up in the normal queue and basically slowed everyone down while they handheld little William down the aisle then got the baby bag sorted and dealt with the arguments over the window seat. Seriously wtf is wrong with people?

Singapore Airlines were very proactive though. They had the ground staff actually walk up to eligible family groups and tell them they could board. I guess people just assume they don't qualify?

Re:Always been fucky.

[WorBlux]

Which is why it's a compile-time, not run-time rule. Each ticket would have the board order printed on it before boarding starts.

Re: Always been fucky.

[LynnwoodRooster]

Wait, you have a hotel that doesn't do laundry? Those are exceedingly rare in my experience. I've encountered that once, the Showakan Forest Inn out at Akishima, Tokyo, Japan. Thankfully the local laundromat is just 10 minutes away. Drop in my clothes to wash, go to dinner next door, get back as the load is finishing, toss into the dryer, wait 15 minutes and I'm done. Much better than carrying around extra bags on the subways, waiting to check bags at the airport/pick them up off the carousel, etc. A backpack should be about all you need, in 99% of the cases.

Re: Always been fucky.

[LinuxLuver]

Yep.

Re: Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes the 1% of people travelling with families won't need any more than a backpack...
And why spend time enjoying the sights in all the cities and towns you travel through when you can spend it sitting in a laundromat watching your clothes tumble around.
Just maybe, other people have different priorities to you?

Re: Always been fucky.

[cthulhu11]

Yes, I have. According to the forms in the ones that do, itâ(TM)s slow and expensive. And one is at the mercy of whatever enzyme-laden products they use.

Leaving all clothes except what Iâ(TM)m wearing unattended seems like tempting fate.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Carewolf]

That is not how that happens.

Anyway the real solution is even easier: Boarding both in the back in and front. It is 4 times faster on average, due to double the bandwidth and half the blocking.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes it does. Let me give you a clue - there are multiple airlines, each with their own loyalty scheme. Think about it.

Re:Always been fucky.

[LynnwoodRooster]

I guess you fly a lot of airlines that are not in the big three mileage alliances, or you don't sign up for mileage plans? Given that most start giving away perks for as little as 25K miles, you'd have to fly rather infrequently (less than 75K/year) or simply not sign up at all - which would be crazy stupid. So either no, you don't fly a lot - or you don't do mileage plans in which case the statement into the thread is irrelevant because it would never apply to you.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

The biggest delay is idiots that fuss with their overhead luggage while standing in the middle of the row blocking everyone. It takes orders of magnitude longer for those people to get out of the way and let boarding continue.

I fly all the time. I walk straight to my seat, taking literally no time to toss my backpack into the correct overhead bin on my way down the isle.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Oswald McWeany]

Personally, I wouldn't pay for first class if it didn't give priority boarding. I want my decompression time prior to the flight.

Even in the slums out back with the rest of the hoi polloi I find there is plenty of "decompression time". Even after I board last, I still sit waiting forever before we take off... of course, in the back there it is more like "Compression" time than "Decompression" time. I always find myself next to the 6'2" wide man whose enormous belly flops over onto my armrest and lap.

Re: Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would anyone want to board first? It just means you have to to sit longer in a place you don't want to be in the first place.

Re:Always been fucky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Try any China airline. Cathay Pacific. Malaysia Air. Ask them if your Bluetooth headphone can be turned on. Heck, they insist you shut off your phone - like, turned off, not just in flight mode. And I fly too - Diamond on Delta and Gold on Cathay, about 270,000 miles a year (181K on Delta this year, 36K on Cathay - so far).

Lynnwoodidiot
LOL, no one believes you fly, especially not in Asia.

I know a faster way to get customers into a plane

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

1) Walk the customers through a propeller
2) Collect the slurry in a pan
3) Pump the slurry into the plane as it drains from the pan

But there are downsides to this method too, such as limited repeat business.

The bottom line

[Anonymous Coward]

The bottom line is to offer a better level of service to those who are willing to pay for it.

Re:The bottom line

[gfxguy]

Except that what they've been doing is making service worse and charging people to keep it the same as it was. And it works. So it's a race to the bottom for all the airlines to cram as many people in as possible while reducing service.

Re:The bottom line

[tomhath]

It doesn't matter if it's actually better. The perception is that if you pay more you should go to the front of the line.

Back to Front

[Only Time Will Tell]

I've never figured out why flights with assigned seats don't load back to front to speed things up. Those seated would have fewer people banging into them as they walk past and the aisles wouldn't be such a jumbled mess of waiting on people in front of you. The downside is that the first class might have less chance to cram their bags into all spaces they can, but I'll let them sacrifice for me.

Re:Back to Front

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never figured out why flights with assigned seats don't load back to front to speed things up.

Agreed. As for Southwest, there is a simple money-making thing they can do. They can charge $2 per bag for overhead compartment space. Checked bags fly free, so let's reduce the number of people who hold up the boarding process trying to fit their bag in somewhere.

Re:Back to Front

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never figured out why flights with assigned seats don't load back to front to speed things up.

The problem is that people seated at the back of the plane will put their bags in overhead compartments anywhere in the plane, thus making it likely that people seated at the front of the plane will have to pass their seats in search of compartment space then walk back against traffic to their seat.

Re:Back to Front

[Anonymous Coward]

If I flew the first class I would want to have the privilege of boarding last and leaving the plane first. The carry on is less of an issue in the first class because the there are fewer seats per meter of overhead compartment. Boarding last would spare all the people passing by and bumping into my seat.

Re:Back to Front

[Anonymous Coward]

The airline is not marketing first class-board last correctly. It has to be like the Titanic -- don't have to be in contact with steerage, procrastinate and get to gate last, baggage loaded and handled for you (get someone who walks you to the plane and loads the luggage into overhead compartment for you, instead of having a flight attendant do it).

Re:Back to Front

[torkus]

I've never figured out why flights with assigned seats don't load back to front to speed things up. Those seated would have fewer people banging into them as they walk past and the aisles wouldn't be such a jumbled mess of waiting on people in front of you. The downside is that the first class might have less chance to cram their bags into all spaces they can, but I'll let them sacrifice for me.

They do, generally, board back to front.

Except First/premium/etc. seats that are towards the front go first...since if you paid extra you want to stand in line less. These seats generally have dedicated bag space, fewer seats to share said space and often come with free checked luggage (or those who fly first have status so same result). This mixes up the order but not horribly as it's a limited # of seats.

Except people with status who get to cut the line. Yeah, this is FUBAR. People from any seat get in the next queue and mess up the boarding line.

Except people who cheat on groups and get away with it. More and more annoying...and slower boarding.

Except people who bring 17 items, half of which don't fit, and then spend 10 minutes arguing. Give up hope now...

Except people who can't step out of the isle to re-pack their bag so they can have the 14 items they MUST have from the very beginning of the flight. Oh god...no more...

Except the people who get lost and can't read numbers or try to change seats...

Except...yeah, it's pointless.

In theory, a strict boarding order could fill the plane MUCH faster. But getting people to follow that would be nearly impossible - the time spent arguing with each out-of-order customer while accommodating the 'priority' people pretty kills it before it begins.

Free checked bags though? Yeah, that's a HUGE time saver for boarding if people don't try to cram a huge suitcase and oversize backpack into the limited overhead and then fight for who gets what space. Check it and be done...except not for a 10% increase in ticket price.

Re:Back to Front

[TWX]

So have the cabin crew close the bins over the rows that aren't boarding, and have them stop passengers that are trying to open the closed bins.

Re:Back to Front

[Only Time Will Tell]

That's true, but you could have a flight attendant stationed near the rear of the plane who monitors and helps people putting up bags so they don't get too crazy. There's always one up front that is doing nothing more than greeting people boarding.

Re:Back to Front

[known_coward_69]

people carry on to avoid the baggage pickup wait. $2 wouldn't stop them

Re:Back to Front

[gfxguy]

People carry on to avoid $25 checked bag fees. $2 wouldn't stop them. I fly for my company a lot, I always check my bag - even if it would fit in the overhead compartment. They force me to have a corporate AMEX card for traveling, but won't pay the $100 annual fee for the Delta AMEX that would let me do it for "free" because some executive can't stomach that I'd get airline miles for business purposes, so, instead, I make them pay $50 per trip and they end up losing money.

Re:Back to Front

[mrun4982]

Lots of airlines do load back-to-front and, contrary to common sense and popular belief, it is not the fastest way to board. Mythbusters did an episode on this. The fastest way is how Southwest does it. No assigned seats and random boarding.

Re:Back to Front

[gfxguy]

Yes - it's mostly the fault of people, not the airlines. "Now boarding rows 40 and higher" and everybody races to the gate. Even when getting your luggage from the carousel: "please stand back until you see your bag so that everybody can see and have access to their bags" and everybody crowds around, mostly the area where the bags initially come out. I personally just stand on the opposite side.

Re:Back to Front

[msauve]

"I've never figured out why flights with assigned seats don't load back to front to speed things up. "

That would make sense, except for the assholes who have seats in the rear and dump their carry-ons into the front overhead bins. Then, when the passengers in front get on, they have to find room in the back bins. Lots of back and forth in a narrow aisle.

I like how Southwest does it.

Re:Back to Front

[JaredOfEuropa]

That's only part of the problem. Many people cram what they can into cabin luggage to avoid the excess weight surcharge. You can see them do it at the checkin counter when the scales go over 20kg on their suitcase.

Re:Back to Front

[JaredOfEuropa]

So have the cabin crew close the bins over the rows that aren't boarding, and have them tase passengers that are trying to open the closed bins.

Better?

Re:Back to Front

[bws111]

I believe that if you are getting any 'bonuses' on a corporate credit card, the bonuses count as ordinary income for tax purposes. That means the company should be doing withholding, paying FICA, etc. The accounting mess makes it much easier to just say 'no bonus cards'.

Re:Back to Front

[angel'o'sphere]

Well
In Europe we do it like this. And use all doors available at the plane.

Re:Back to Front

[gfxguy]

Either way, it makes it easier for me to check bags.

Re:Back to Front

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to fly with my boss that absolutely refused to check any bags... even though the company would be paying for it.

Which means anyone travelling with him can't check bags because we are driving together and he thinks that the extra 5 minutes it will save him would do any good.

Re:Back to Front

[rwa2]

Yeah, I heard Japan worked with Boeing to create some really efficient boarding processes since forever.... to get the quickest turnaround times, they'd dock their 747s with 2 gates up front and 2 gates in the back, and start boarding from the front while passengers were still departing from the rear.

Since Japan is so small the 747s they were flying around inside the country were doing many many more landing cycles per day than Boeing had designed them for (intercontinental flight). So they also had to reinforce the landing gear so they could keep up with the way Japan was using them for several short-haul flights per day.

Re:Back to Front

[LynnwoodRooster]

I love to see people do this on most Asian carriers. They cheerfully smile at you and say "this is not your group, please step aside"...

Who wants to get on first?

[magarity]

Honestly, except for needing to stuff an oversize bag in the overhead no one should want to be crammed into the stuffy airborne-infection-enabling metal tube any sooner than absolutely necessary to take off on time. Yet so many seem to treat it like trying to grab a seat on the subway.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[Oswald McWeany]

Honestly, except for needing to stuff an oversize bag in the overhead no one should want to be crammed into the stuffy airborne-infection-enabling metal tube any sooner than absolutely necessary to take off on time. Yet so many seem to treat it like trying to grab a seat on the subway.

That's the only reason I want to board quicker.

If I'm first on, I get to place my bag close to me. If I'm last on, I have to place my bag frequently far from my seat. I always carry my luggage carry on. I'm rarely gone for more than a week (and I can get a week's clothes in carry on). I don't want to pay extra to check luggage, so I get the maximum carryon size allowed (I do check), and I stuff it full.

Usually though, routes I fly, they check my "carry on" free at the gate because flights are always overcrowded and they give free checking to people at the gate. I don't remember the last flight I had where they didn't check for free at the gate. I laugh at the suckers who paid to check their baggage. :)

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[torkus]

It's all about the overhead space! ...or occasionally not stewing in the icky terminal. Especially if you're flying business or first.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[nedlohs]

The people without an oversized still want to put their normal sized bag overhead rather than taking up their tiny leg room - and thus are racing with the oversized bag carriers (who need to get it overhead since it won't fit under the seat in front).

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[Solandri]

The problem isn't getting on early enough to squeeze an oversize bag into the overhead bin. It's someone else with an oversize bag getting on before you and hogging up all the overhead space, forcing you to put your medium-sized bag underneath the seat in front of you where it cuts into your foot room, or having a flight attendant put your bag into an overhead space way in the back so you'll have to wait for everyone to disembark before you can get your bag and get off.

Basically, a lot of the problem could be mitigated if the airlines would start to strictly enforce the carry-on size limits, or even reduce the carry-on size limit. They're just afraid to because a lot of their best-paying customers are business travelers who pack all their overnight or multi-day clothes and supplies into a single large carry-on.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[edtice1559]

As others have said, early boarding is the price you pay in order to get an overhead space which is really an awful system. I travel a lot for business and would gladly pay for a reserved overhead space if that was available. But instead the airlines charge for checked baggage (something that most of us go to great lengths to avoid). If checked baggage were free and cabin baggage were $50, I'd pay the fee every time and board dead last. It's really a function of the airlines not knowing their customers. I guess people who work for airlines don't every fly on business.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[Anonymous Coward]

uh - a lot of people would rather sit and go to sleep or do whatever instead of standing in line.

also it doesn't matter how big the bag is if the bins are already full.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[Kevin Stevens]

This probably depends a lot on the airport, but I traveled over 100k miles last year, but checking vs not checking can be the difference of an hour+ in your total travel time. I have been forced to gate check going to Newark and literally waited an hour for the carousel to start moving. This is not insignifcant. This is (another) missed dinner with your family, or an hour of lost sleep or decompression time. This is an hour later to the office, which may be a big problem depending on whether you have an important meeting to attend.

Newark is an extreme case, but even waiting an extra 30 minutes when you are a frequent business traveler is really irritating (think about when you are doing 30+ flights a year... for work...)

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[gfxguy]

I check my bags because the company pays. If they'd pony up the $100 for the Skymiles upgrade to the corporate AMEX card, they'd save money, but some executive somewhere couldn't stomach the idea that employees might benefit from free miles when using their corporate cards - so, in my case, it's more out of spite.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[gfxguy]

Why? I get when people want to save money, but I'd rather check the bag instead of having to lug it around the airport all day. All my valuables are still with me in my backpack anyway, and while I've had lost luggage before, it was a LONG time ago and it's actually quite rare.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[DogDude]

To me, time spent in ANY terminal, no matter how bad, is better than sitting on a plane for one second more than I have to. At least in a shitty terminal, I can move my limbs. First class, coach class, I don't care. I'm always the last to board

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[aaarrrgggh]

If you travel a lot, you want to be able to get to your seat and wind down before takeoff. It is true for parents with screaming kids and business travelers with noise cancelling headphones because of the screaming kids alike. You want your bag stowed, any of your own seat shuffling to be done, and start relaxing just a little bit.

When you are in first, the incentives can also include the pre-departure drink, not waiting in a long line, etc.

I'm not sure if the fastest boarding is the most efficient or maximum value boarding process anyway. Generally being able to push back once the cabin door is closed is going to free up the gate faster than shaving a couple minutes off people taking their seats.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[PKFC]

I guess I don't understand it. I'm a pretty bug guy so why would I want to race to get on a plane just to sit in a cramped seat for longer? I wait around the gate until final boarding call just because that is less stressful and more comfortable. All the yahoos have already fought over whatever it is they do and I can just walk in, sit down and have the shortest wait until takeoff.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why?

1) Watch them load and unload it sometime
2) You have to go get it, usually waiting for them to actually load into onto the conveyor
3) Oh look, it's not there. WTF?

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[Anonymous Coward]

also it doesn't matter how big the bag is if the bins are already full.

Thank you. I have an undersized soft bag I like to use, and even then half the time I arrive to mostly full overhead bins and end up having a flight attendant shove it in an overhead twenty seats away from me, which makes getting off the plane that much more exciting.

Of course, once or twice I've ended up with it going where my feet would prefer to be, which my 6' 2" body doesn't appreciate either.

Re: Who wants to get on first?

[Anonymous Coward]

You'll change your mind when you run into a double booking and someone already sitting in your seat. In those cases the first butt in the seat usually wins.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[angel'o'sphere]

Well,
seems to bbe either an american or a white men problem.
Where ever I was flying people put their hand luggage over their head.
Why would Input my $2k somewhere in the fromt rows luggafe compartment and sit myself in the rear of the plane?
How one can be so stupid not to put his own luggafe above his own head is beyond me.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[edtice1559]

Lug it around the airport all day? You must not travel for business? Vacation travelers tend to show up at the airport 2-3 hours before their flight. Regular travelers leave their house an hour before the flight, walk to the gate, and get on the plane. We're not in the airport long enough to stop for the bathroom. Okay I don't usually leave an hour before the flight, I target 1.5 hours, but that gives a half an hour leeway in case something goes wrong. When everything is smooth, have a half an hour to answer some emails before boarding. It's not hard to move a black pull-bag around. And your backpack fits over the handle so it's ergonomically superior to carrying the backpack if you have anything heavy (like a Dell "laptop")

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[orgelspieler]

agreed. I never understood why first class people want to get on the plane so early. Even if the seats are comfy, you're still in a tiny metal tube with stinky air. Plus you have to watch all the other people go by glaring at you. Same thing goes for getting off the plane. Everybody stands up as soon as the light goes off. Why? Especially if you have to wait for luggage anyway, there's just no point in trying to get off the plane ahead of the person in the seat in front of you.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[orgelspieler]

hmmm.. I guess I like to use that time to talk to a fellow traveler and enjoy some random human companionship. Then again, not everybody's friendly after a redeye. I don't understand why they don't enforce the carry-on size rules, though. If they would, not nearly as many people would have to gate check. (or at least a different subset of people would)

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[swb]

I agree with you about the headaches of people with too-large carry-on bags, but it ain't the business travelers who are doing it.

My wife has been Delta Platinum and/or Diamond status for several years and she pretty much has to buy a new bag every 18 months because she wears them out. If you have a very recent better bag like a Travelpro it is for sure meeting the airlines size requirements.

Plus the business travelers for the most part understand the system and hate the people who abuse it or stretch the limits because they know it makes everything slow down.

Based on my observations the worst travelers are the semi-entitled frequent leisure travelers, and often women. Not only do they have a max-size carry-on, they have a gigantic "personal item" shoulder bag which neither fits well under the seat nor efficiently in the overhead bin, which is often a kind of Russian nesting doll with ANOTHER, more realistic sized personal item shoved into it, too. When they have this, the stealth carry-on goes under the seat (snacks, magazines, laptop, etc) and the clunky bag takes up an entire carry on slot in the overhead bin, along with their max-size roll-aboard). They appear to be well-off and have an attitude that they have it all figured out and the rules don't apply to them, which I suspect extends to other spheres of their lives.

The actual infrequent leisure travelers aren't that bad. They're baffled by security (don't get behind them!) but generally they check their bags because they don't *own* a recent bag that could be carried on board, they just have the one suitcase suitable for a week or a weekend. They're slower, but not inconsiderate.

IMHO, it's debatable whether "suitcases" should be brought on board by anyone. Allowing it only invites abuse of the sizing rules. What the airlines should do is make everyone check their bag (1st free) and for people who REALLY don't want to, convert the first row of coach seats into a floor-to-ceiling baggage locker and SELL access to it for $$$. People who REALLY want their luggage in the cabin can have it then and it will be reasonably stacked and accessible when they walk off the plane. The entitled fuckwits won't pay for this and so their 2.5 carry-ons won't be a problem for everyone else.

But this whole debate is pointless because the airlines don't give a shit except about profit.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[GNious]

but some executive somewhere couldn't stomach the idea that employees might benefit from free miles when using their corporate cards

Different places, different rules, but if you (privately) get miles from using a company-booked flight, might be subject to tax on those miles, and company may have to do paperwork on it.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm the exact opposite of this as a skinny guy.

There are two things that are extremely important to me when I fly.

First: That I manage to get my carry on into an overhead bin, as I have long legs so having to stuff it under the seat in front of me is excruciating. Second is claiming the armrest. I don't enjoy feeling trapped in my seat as I often did until I learned that very important second step. I put my arm there and will not move it until I'm sure that the person next to me understands this is my space. Inevitably it is usually some oversized individual that feels they're entitled to spill over into my seat.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[argStyopa]

You said it yourself: "...except for needing to stuff an oversize bag in the overhead..."

Yes, if I have no luggage whatsoever, I couldn't care less when I get on. However, how often do people fly with NO LUGGAGE, no laptop case, no purse?

I'm 6'4", 300 lbs, I will pay a few extra bucks to get on early to prevent that crappy situation where the overheads are full and I have to stuff my gear under the seat ahead of me turning the microscopic legroom into nonexistent legroom.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[Anonymous Coward]

They over-book flights on purpose and despite assigning you a reserved seat on the ticket they basically make it a free-for-all contest once they start to board the last group. If you're last, you may get kicked over to a later flight and miss your connecting flight.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[Anonymous Coward]

Watch the people boarding first. They are usually frequent flyers/business types.

They all have been there and done that and almost to a person, prefer boarding first.

After a few dozen or hundred trips a year, you start looking for every little edge. TSA Precheck, Global Entry, firstclass/bizclass upgrades, lounge access. The best bar in each airport.

The value of boarding first far outweighs the downsides. 10-15 minutes extra sitting in your first class/bizclass seat versus getting stuck waiting for half the plane to clear out before you can wade upstream to retrieve your bag that you had to stuff into Row 30? Yeah, I'll board early, get situated and comfortable, and take my pre-flight drink.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a cunt. The armrests are for the person in the middle. The guy at the window gets the window. The woman on the aisle gets the aisle. The poor wanker stuck in the middle, at the very least, gets both armrests. Stop being a cunt and breaking this rule.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFx1Cpxpx1E

Re: Who wants to get on first?

[Anonymous Coward]

With a modern booking/seating system this is entirely inexcusable. I wouldn't fly with that airline: if they can't seat the passengers then they probably can't schedule the maintenance either.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[Carewolf]

To me, time spent in ANY terminal, no matter how bad, is better than sitting on a plane for one second more than I have to. At least in a shitty terminal, I can move my limbs. First class, coach class, I don't care. I'm always the last to board

Yeah, but many airlines close boarding before most passengers are in their seats. So if you wait until the last moment, you end up spending more time being packed like a sadine in the overheated tin tube leading to the aircraft.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[Oswald McWeany]

Well,
seems to bbe either an american or a white men problem.
Where ever I was flying people put their hand luggage over their head.
Why would Input my $2k somewhere in the fromt rows luggafe compartment and sit myself in the rear of the plane?
How one can be so stupid not to put his own luggafe above his own head is beyond me.

It's because there isn't enough room in the overhead. If one row of seats takes up two rows of overhead space, then the next row, if they take more space than they need... by the time you get to row 35- you've got no free space anywhere near you. The last people to board have to play tetris in order to find a spot to put their luggage.

No one WANTS to put their overhead luggage half a plane-distance away from them. If you're one of the last on though it is a fate you're doomed with.

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[angel'o'sphere]

Neer saw something like this in a European plane.
You basically can not bring more hand luggage than what would fit over your head (or below the seat in front of you).

Re:Who wants to get on first?

[Oswald McWeany]

Neer saw something like this in a European plane.
You basically can not bring more hand luggage than what would fit over your head (or below the seat in front of you).

Didn't use to be a problem in the States until they added more seats (but no extra bins) and also started charging $25 per checked bag. Now people try to check as few bags as possible and put as much into carry on as possible because if it saves you $25 or $50 to do that... then that's what you do.

They're not interested ...

[Anonymous Coward]

"The question for the airlines, then, is not how to get everyone onto a plane as quickly as possible," Davies writes. "It's how to get everyone onto a plane as quickly as possible while still charging them extra for bags"

Airlines operate on exceedingly thin margins, and the little things they allow you to pay extra for are huge cash cows. In fact, those little extras are what makes them profits.

They're not going to give you free baggage check if it means they lose booked fares or higher fuel costs.

Reducing your boarding time isn't their priority, lightening your wallet is.

Re:They're not interested ...

[nedlohs]

You would think that strictly enforcing carry on size and weight limits and charging an $X fee for each item outside the limits would generate them more profits and remove one of the main delaying factors (people which huge bags stuffing them in the overhead bins on the miles away from their seat).

Re:They're not interested ...

[bws111]

But then you wind up with idiots arguing with the gate attendant and further clogging up the line. See recent stories about snowflakes and their 'emotional support animals' that they were stupid enough to believe they could take on the plane.

Re:They're not interested ...

[Mike Van Pelt]

Airlines operate on exceedingly thin margins, and the little things they allow you to pay extra for are huge cash cows. In fact, those little extras are what makes them profits.

They're not going to give you free baggage check if it means they lose booked fares or higher fuel costs.

But oddly enough, Southwest has lower listed prices, even though they are just about alone in not charging for the first two checked bags. (If you even think another airline's fare on a flight is better, first add $50/bag to the price, and think again.)

Back to Front Would Fix Half of It

[Anonymous Coward]

The only reason I understand some of the reason they go front to back is because of First Class. But fine, let them board and then go back to front.

Half of the wait time is due to people getting to the seat and then having to put up their baggage and get settled, which the entire line behind them is just standing there, staring at an empty back of the plane.

Is there any (good) reason they don't do back to front boarding?

Re:Back to Front Would Fix Half of It

[mrun4982]

Lots of airline do load back to front and it's not a very good method. Mythbusters even did an episode on boarding a plane. They determined the best way to board is how Southwest does it. No assigned seats and random boarding. Back to front is often times not much better than many other methods because because it makes boarding a serial process. In other words, only one person can put their luggage in the overhead space and sit at a time. Anytime you do this, it really slows down the boarding. With Southwest's method, for example, there's a much greater chance that several people can be doing that at once. If you must have assigned seating, then a good method is to load in zones where each zone has people spread throughout the plane, at least a couple rows apart. Then, you have a better chance of more than one person being able to load their luggage and sit at once.

Re:Back to Front Would Fix Half of It

[gfxguy]

They used to do back to front boarding. I mostly fly Delta now, which uses "zones," but zone 1 doesn't necessarily equate to being in the back, and then they load First Class, "Premiere," "Executives" and whatnot first, then handicapped people and people flying with children... the plane is half full by the time they start boarding zone 1. But even way back when, they'd call "now boarding rows 40 and higher" and everybody would run up to and crowd around the gate anyway.

Re:Back to Front Would Fix Half of It

[Obfuscant]

They determined the best way to board is how Southwest does it.

Define "best". I bet they defined it as "fastest". Fastest is not always best. For example, under SW's method, anyone boarding in the last 1/3 of the line is going to get a middle seat, probably. If you think it is "best" to have a 300 pound person in a middle seat just because he couldn't check in soon enough, then you're welcome to have 300 pound paxs next to you on every flight. I can attest to the fact that it is not best for anyone involved.

Then imagine a family of four trying to fly somewhere and they're later in line. Four middle seats. Cool. Or beg everyone around them to switch to a middle seat so they can get four closer together. Sure.

Why is there this concern about faster boarding to the exclusion of all other considerations? You're all getting there at the same time, and the boarding time is built into the system. You aren't leaving ten minutes early just because you shaved ten minutes off the boarding time. You're leaving at the scheduled time anyway.

Re:Back to Front Would Fix Half of It

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason none of the optimized solutions work is that not everyone is at the gate when boarding starts and not everyone is traveling as an individual. Families really screw things up because mom isn't going to send Timmy two year old to board the plan first or leave him at the gate while she boards.

Re:Back to Front Would Fix Half of It

[LynnwoodRooster]

On Delta, handicapped and families with small children come first. Then first class/diamonds (Premium), then Sky Priority, then everyone else. At least that's how I've seen it done on the few hundred Delta flights I've taken in the last year.

Re:Back to Front Would Fix Half of It

[dyslexicbunny]

It's inefficient too. Optimum is to utilize the Southwest approach but you queue up into 12 groups. Odd groups are port side of the craft and even are starboard side.

Groups 1-4 are the window seats where you alternate every other row. If economy are rows 6-30, group 1 would be the even rows 6-30 and group 3 the odd with 2 and 4 being the accompanying starboard side. The order of the line would be aft to fore of the plane. If you stop anywhere that isn't your row, your luggage will be removed and stored under the plane (as there needs to be consequences for improper boarding).

Repeat for the middle and aisle seats with groups 5-8 and 9-12 respectively using the same organization you did for the window seats. Because no one is stopping, throughput will be maximized. Families can board together when they have adjacent seating (to discourage families from booking two aisle seats or an aisle and a window).

Can't avoid throwing the Leftist propaganda in

[alternative_right]

maintaining the system that, like all class structures, serves whoever built it

We should all be equal, amirite? Class structures exist because people have different abilities, but that offends Leftists, so they always have to throw those little jabs in there. If we wants truly equal, he should go to the third world where everyone is equally starving and confused.

Re:Can't avoid throwing the Leftist propaganda in

[edtice1559]

I agree that the OP was flamebait. And I'm not a proponent of class warfare. But somebody's value as a *person* is not the same as their *economic* value. There are poor people who are very decent and rich people who are real bastards. But air travel certainly does seem to blur these lines. Travel often and you're worthy of a blanket. Not so much and you can just freeze to death. Reminds you of the scene in Titanic where they evacuate the first class passengers first. That's probably coming at some point to air travel. "In the event of an emergency please evacuate with your assigned cabin."

Re:Can't avoid throwing the Leftist propaganda in

[bws111]

What a load of crap. Everybody makes 'value' judgements about another persons 'worth', whether they admit it or not. For instance, I am sure that all else being equal, you would prioritize a member of your family over a stranger.

Re:Can't avoid throwing the Leftist propaganda in

[edtice1559]

Well of course I would and I assume that others would do the same thing. But what I wouldn't do is declare that my family members are somehow innately superior just because they are my family member. If my sister were second in line for a kidney transplant, I wouldn't go murder the person ahead of her. That's an apropos example if you remember Steve Jobs doing what amounted to jumping the transplant queue.

Re:Can't avoid throwing the Leftist propaganda in

[bws111]

So how exactly are the airlines saying frequent fliers are 'innately superior'? I don't know how you manged to get from 'blankets' to 'kidney transplants'. If you have one blanket and two people who a a little chilly (freezing to death, really?), who should get the blanket? If you give it to your wife instead of the cute babe on the other side of you, the wife is happy, you are happy, and the cute babe is still chilly. Do it the other way and the cute babe (who you will probably never see again) is warmer but the wife is now extremely hot, and you probably will not be enjoying yourself for a while.

It is the same thing with the airlines: do they give the blanket to the customer who has given them a lot of business, or do they give it to someone who hardly ever flies? Do it right and you have a happy regular customer and a new customer who thinks 'meh'. Do it wrong and you have an irate formerly regular customer. Which do you pick?

Quit trying to make it sound like they are making some judgement on the value of the human being. They aren't. They are making judgement on the value of a relationship, even if it is only an economic relationship.

Re:Can't avoid throwing the Leftist propaganda in

[Anonymous Coward]

And why the hell should whether someone gets a blanket depend on someone's "value as a person" (as judged by whom? You?) instead on whether or not he paid for it?

Re:Can't avoid throwing the Leftist propaganda in

[edtice1559]

You don't ever have one blanket and two chilly people. You have ten blankets and two chilly people. But one of them gets a blanket and the other is told that it isn't offered at their level. Or you have somebody who desperately needs the bathroom and the first-class one is open but no matter what the situation they won't be allowed to use the bathroom. In one sense it's quite reasonable. These are pure economic criteria. But it's also dehumanizing.

Re:I know a faster way to get customers into a pla

[JustOK]

vector jet exhaust into cabin

Never fly

[Anonymous Coward]

My solution is not to fly. I haven't been on an airplane since 9/11 and I don't ever plan to fly again.

Re:Never fly

[gfxguy]

Your town is your oyster.

Re:Never fly

[Spy Handler]

Sucks to be you. My solution is to never fly *commercial*. Flying my own airplane, as long as the destination is under 1100 nautical miles I save time vs. flying in an overcrowded 737.

That figures

[OneHundredAndTen]

Starting about 20 years ago, the commercial airlines business has become a race to the bottom - the goal is to find out who can offer the worst services, while at the same time squeezing as much money as possible out of the passengers, while minimizing the loss of business.

Re:That figures

[edtice1559]

Well when the only thing they have to compete on is price, what else would happen? People only shop by fare. Not that I blame the other customers. I do the same thing.

Re:That figures

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm pretty sure passenger service has operated at a loss from year dot. First it was just trying to coax people into planes by making it sexy, now it's trying to figure out how to make it work as a business model after years of loss leading and globalization.

I mean what airlines from the 60s/70s are still around to tell the tale?

Re:That figures

[Solandri]

This isn't a race to the bottom. For those of you who aren't old enough to remember air travel before deregulation, prices were about twice as high back then.

If you want as much service and frills as we had back then, you can still get them by paying extra for them. The only thing that's changed is that you have the option of paying less if you're willing to give up the frills and additional service. If you choose to pay less for worse service, then that's your decision. Not the airline's.

Re:That figures

[fermion]

So I flew when you could pug anything on a plane. Televisions, air conditioning units, anything that could be put in a box and moved through to the plane. And there were no practice limits to how many boxes you could have.

I don't think we want to go back there due to the disparity of costs. Airplanes costs are largely weight, at least for luggage. The limiting factor for people is the number of seats, and some people are required to buy two seats. But I have been planes where they have had to adjust the luggage to make the weight to take off, and where we have strictly been limited to two bags because of other requirement for the flight.

In the end ticket prices would go up as you would be paying for someone else to take a big screen TV with them. It is easy enough to choose an airline based on how many free bags you want and other stuff. You can pay more or less for your ticket. The way I fly is always two free bags and two free carry on.

Re:That figures

[gfxguy]

Yes - that is the cause. There really is no solution. If you offered a "premium" airline, you'd go out of business pretty quickly, I think.

Re:That figures

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't a race to the bottom.

service and frills as we had back then

prices were about twice as high

I almost wonder if maybe that's why it's called a race to the bottom?

Re:That figures

[j-beda]

This isn't a race to the bottom. For those of you who aren't old enough to remember air travel before deregulation, prices were about twice as high back then.

 

I notice that the data graph in the article STARTS with the date of deregulation. As I recall from a Consumer Reports article a decade or so back, the rate of price dropping actually was HIGHER before deregulation, which might make someone think that things would be cheaper if we had just continued that.

I like this quote: "The most rigorous analysis of the impact of deregulation was done by David B. Richards, formerly of the CAB and FAA. His research concluded, “This paper makes clear that the grant of pricing freedom to the airline industry has generally resulted in average prices being higher than they would have been had regulation continued...”" from https://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Free Baggage Checks?

[jellomizer]

As much as I as a consumer would prefer to not pay extra for a Baggage check, I don't think it is as much the cost that is hindering people from checking their baggage but the hassle of doing such.

Hassle 1: Waiting in line to get it checked, as now your boarding pass can often be printed from home or from a kiosk at the airport, you don't need to wait in line to check your baggage.
Hassle 2: Waiting for it to get out of the plane. After a long flight, you just want to get to your destination. Having to wait 20-40 minutes more for your bag to show up.
Hassle 3: Lost baggage. It sucks when your bags get lost, get more airline miles then you do. In this case it is a tripple whammy, because you have already gone thru many hassles before, to only get your bags lost, having to report it... Pick it up if it is found....

In short other then the cost, there is a lot of hassle for your belongings that are important to you, but just an other bag to everyone else.

Re:Free Baggage Checks?

[bluefoxlucid]

I didn't see much of a scientific rationale behind the article's assertions. Truth be told, the guy talking doesn't display any sort of credential--not a certification or whanot, but at least an explanation of the merits of what he's saying. All he says is airlines are doing a bunch of stuff and they're stupid and his way would be better because it would.

Re:Free Baggage Checks?

[gfxguy]

I fly several times a year for my company, and I completely disagree. I think it's more perception than reality.

1) This is the most valid point, but unless you're late to the airport it's a moot point, because the plane's not leaving any sooner because you didn't have to check a bag. If you are late, then it's your own damn fault.

2) Nearly every time I've flown the bag is already there by the time I get to the carousel, or within 5 minutes or so. It depends when you get off the plane. If you rush off, pushing and shoving people out of your way so that you can be first, then you will wait longer.

3) Yes... I've even had luggage lost before. But the fact is that it's really quite rare. Last stat I read didn't clearly say how much was lost, but "Mishandled" bags was around 0.6%, I would expect most of that was damage - and while it may be a hassle, airlines are responsible for up to over $3k per lost bag, so they are actually doing quite a bit to stop it from happening. They REALLY do not want to lose your luggage. From this report, airlines are "now 70 percent less likely to lose our bags than they were 10 years ago."

I've flown for quite some time, and I can tell you that when they didn't charge for checked bags, a LOT fewer people used carry-ons.

Re:Free Baggage Checks?

[jellomizer]

1) Airports are two different worlds (as any frequent flier knows) one one side of the TSA is where you get your tickets and check your baggage. This is the stressful part, because you don't know how long it will take to get to the other world. So waiting in Line, while logically will be moot, it means less time in the other area where you can run to your terminal, or if you get there earlier have restaurants and bars to entertain yourself, and in general be more relaxed.

2) For me the flights when arrived are often late at night and past my bedtime. I just want to be in a Taxi or Rental car and to the Hotel ASAP.

3) While the risk is down, it is still there. Getting compensated for a bag isn't as nice as getting it. What often happens is if your traveling with a group of people, chances are higher that one of them would have lost luggage.

While flying my stress level is a 3/10. If I have checked luggage it is 5/10 just because flying I am already not in control of my destiny, having additional things that I don't have control over, just makes it worse.

Re:Free Baggage Checks?

[AmiMoJo]

Some terminals are better than others. Some charge 2x normal price for everything and you can't sit down without paying up. Others are relatively pleasant places to be.

Re:Free Baggage Checks?

[Anonymous Coward]

I fly several times a month for my company, and I'm not sure what world you are living in.

1. I'll agree with you here. It's not that big of a hassle.

2. Disagree. It's been 10 years since I arrived at a carousel to see my bag. And I've probably checked bags at nearly every major airport in this country.

3. Mostly disagree. While I would agree that it is rare for luggage to be late, it can't be that rare when nearly everybody has experienced it at least once. It's happened to me a few times. Although these days I use carry-on for 90% of my flights, and fly non-stop 90% of the time.

Re:Free Baggage Checks?

[bws111]

You nailed it. Whenever family members are travelling they always send two texts: I'm home, and 'through security'. 'Through security' to me represents 'I did my part, now it is up to the airline to get me home'. Prior to that is all the stress.

Re:Free Baggage Checks?

[shilly]

You should see how EasyJet is solving #1 in Europe, where they have huge numbers of leisure travellers flying from Gatwick, typically as families for two weeks in the sun and thus almost all with luggage.

http://www.futuretravelexperie...

Having done this, I can attest there is essentially zero waiting in line. It's genuinely a massive step forward.

Tarmac Time

[sdinfoserv]

Boarding the plane isn't so bad... it's the time after boarding, after the plane pushes away from the gate, sitting on the tarmac with out much air circulation - that's the worst.
"on time" is defined by the time the plane leaves the gate - even when it sits on the runway for 2 hours waiting...... so airlines are incentivized to just "push away" and sit.

Re:Tarmac Time

[gfxguy]

I thought "on time" is defined by when it lands. And the fact is that more and more flights are "on time" because they pad the arrival time (like saying a 1.5 hour flight will arrive 2 hours after scheduled departure time); perhaps it's just building in those typical delays into the estimates.

Re:Tarmac Time

[angel'o'sphere]

Wow ...
Comsider this: if the plane is blocking a terminal for 2h it is blocked for all other plannes ... and it costs, obvioulsy.

Re:Tarmac Time

[sdinfoserv]

You've never flown and had a gate change?

Re:Tarmac Time

[angel'o'sphere]

You mean a flight that departs from a different gate?

No, I guess I fly not often enough for that.

charge for carry-on

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been saying something similar for a while. The airlines should charge for carry-ons and not for checked bags. The whole process would be quicker and easier.

They don't want it faster

[dgreer]

Airlines have a checklist of things that the pilot and ground crew need to do and those things take a certain amount of time. Keeping people busy boarding means they aren't complaining about sitting at the gate or waiting to board when the plane is already there.

The delay is a feature, not a bug.

The real answer is to work within psychology

[SuperKendall]

The fastest way possible to load would be to use Southwest's system where people can pick their own seat, with a twist - the plane always unloads from the opposite door they load in, and every landing you switch doors you dock at front to back.

Everyone wants to sit to get off as soon as possible, so under this system the first people in would flock to the back and not block up people just trying to get on.

The other thing that slows down boarding is carry-ons. I do think maybe airlines should have checked luggage free but charge for carry-on bags that go in overhead, so they'd be less common and go to those that really need carry on. If people knew they would be getting carry-on space for sure they would not be so desperate to board early.

Another system that would help a lot with checking bags is some system you could call SureCheck, that would text you when your bag(s) had entered the hold of the plane. Most people would feel more secure in checking bags if they could perhaps see what part of the airport baggage handler process the bag was in. It would involve a lot of technology but I think increased check-ins would be worth it overall...

Re:The real answer is to work within psychology

[blahbooboo]

That's actually an interesting idea to charge for carry on but not for checked luggage. I imagine the cost of checked luggage would be an issue in the long run.

Re:The real answer is to work within psychology

[SuperKendall]

Maybe, Southwest currently doesn't charge for checked or carry-on, and they manage OK...

You just need to bake the cost of handling an average amount of luggage into your fees. Of course, un-baking that is what has led to so many carriers charging for baggage so they can reduce the apparent cost of a flight. But I think enough tools now present baggage fees when you are searching for flights, that going back to free checked luggage and raising the ticket price a bit would not lose customers.

Re:The real answer is to work within psychology

[denbesten]

The other thing that slows down boarding is carry-ons. I do think maybe airlines should have checked luggage free but charge for carry-on bags that go in overhead

Just let everyone without a carry-on deplane before the overheads are opened. I'd much rather wait 20 min in baggage claim if it meant I could avoid 10 minutes getting off the plane.

Re:The real answer is to work within psychology

[SuperKendall]

That sounds good in theory but the practical reality of it is that it is too much hassle letting people out of window and center seats and shuffling everyone back out of the way so just those people can get out... unloading seems slow at times but is no-where near as slow as loading usually is. Plus again, if you enticed people not to use overhead storage they would all be out a lot faster as well as boarding faster.

Re:The real answer is to work within psychology

[Nidi62]

The other thing that slows down boarding is carry-ons. I do think maybe airlines should have checked luggage free but charge for carry-on bags that go in overhead, so they'd be less common and go to those that really need carry on. If people knew they would be getting carry-on space for sure they would not be so desperate to board early.

A lot of airlines use even narrow-body aircraft to carry freight in the cargo bins. Every time you fly you could very likely have a couple thousands pounds of mail, cargo, or even a human body or 2 sitting under you. Free checked bags means less room for cargo which is a pretty big money maker.

Re:The real answer is to work within psychology

[cmaurand]

Actually Southwest did a study on this several years ago. They concluded that even with reserved seats, the fastest way to get passengers on the plane is ad-hoc.

Re:The real answer is to work within psychology

[Dragonslicer]

That's actually an interesting idea to charge for carry on but not for checked luggage. I imagine the cost of checked luggage would be an issue in the long run.

One airline that I've flown on charges for both, but a carry-on is more expensive than a checked bag.

Re:The real answer is to work within psychology

[K. S. Kyosuke]

the fastest way to get passengers on the plane is ad-hoc.

Sooo...randomized algorithms win again?

Re:The real answer is to work within psychology

[Anonymous Coward]

The other thing that slows down boarding is carry-ons. I do think maybe airlines should have checked luggage free but charge for carry-on bags that go in overhead

The reason to charge for checked luggage is because it involves all the logistics of getting the bag from the check-in counter to the plane and then from the plane to the baggage claim.
The carry-on bag, on the other hand, I carry it all the way, there's no cost at all for the airline. So, the day an airline starts charging for that "privilege" is the day I stop flying that airline...

Re:The real answer is to work within psychology

[thegarbz]

Everyone wants to sit to get off as soon as possible, so under this system the first people in would flock to the back and not block up people just trying to get on.

Huh? Since when does getting on first or last have anything to do with seat selection? The seats at the front are most popular due to them being significantly quieter.

Re:The real answer is to work within psychology

[LynnwoodRooster]

If only we can tie that randomization into blockchain, we could make trillions...

Re:The real answer is to work within psychology

[Anonymous Coward]

It's cute that you think the pricing of things is based on the cost of delivering them.

Re:The real answer is to work within psychology

[Anonymous Coward]

When I lived in the US I exclusively flew JetBlue because of their free checked bag policy, plus my local airport was a JetBlue hub so I could get almost anywhere easily. I just checked my bag and waited until the line was down to five people before I got on the plane. Too bad they charge for bags now; I had to go back to the US for business and took a short flight while there and the madness was just as bad as other airlines. At least their seat pitch is still the best for my long legs.

Mythbusters already solved that one.

[Anonymous Coward]

https://mythresults.com/airplane-boarding

Re:Mythbusters already solved that one.

[Anonymous Coward]

No assigned seats: Business boarded first, then all other passengers chose their own seats. 14:07 minutes -5 satisfaction

Of course "No assigned seats" is the fastest. There's no effort to "sort" the passengers, matching ticket to seat number. It is also the least satisfactory to customers, where "everybody wants a window" or "be near the restroom" envy kicks in.

Why should they care?

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

It is a free market. Some airline or the other will decide to charge a little more to all and offer smoother boarding. Sooner or later. If enough people are willing to pay that extra money for hassle free boarding, that airline will make tons of money and others will copy it.

It was not long time ago when domestic flights allowed two free checked in bags, each 70 lb. Heck, I still have those suitcases. Then it became 50 lb and then one checked in bag, and then no checked in bag. Southwest still gives free checked in bags, No preallocated seats. Still reserves A1 to A30 group for frequent fliers and people who pay...

If people valued it enough, and were willing to pay enough, all airlines would have copied it. Fact of the matter is, most people are cheap skates, they would rather stuff 70 lb into a carry on that no one could carry and save 25$.

Just don't fly with Ryanair

[Anonymous Coward]

Problem solved.

Why are airlines in business again?

[GregMmm]

Airlines are there to make profit, so if how they board the plane meet the best profits, then they will do it. If by saving time would make more money, which it should, then the airlines will do it. It's about what makes the most money. Now if you're willing to pay more to board sooner, I'm sure the airlines will take you money.

As the wise song says:

It's all about the money, money money!!

and if we at the airlines can make you happy along the way, great!

The United test has little to do with speed

[SlaveToTheGrind]

As described here, it's mainly about trying to keep so many people from getting up and standing in line all at the same time and clogging up the walkways. Group 1 boards through lane 1 and group 2 through lane 2, then groups 3/4/5 board through lane 2 while group 1/2 stragglers continue through lane 1.

The only part where they're experimenting with altering boarding order according to window/middle/aisle position is people in groups 3/4/5. So query though how much this really changes things when the majority of most flights are groups 1 and 2. (It probably helps a bit given that the group 3/4/5 crowd tends to be less frequent travelers who don't tend to board as efficiently on average. But making families who are sitting together board separately is probably going to create chaos/inefficiencies of its own, so who knows if there's a net benefit at the end of the day.)

Carry-ons

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not the airlines. It's the people bringing too many carry-ons with not enough space. They're inconsiderate when queuing and cause all kinds of delay when storing and/or finding space. Loading the plane back to front, and free check-in for carry-ons helps only a little. It's a no-win situation for the airlines to enforce or further restrict whatever limit and size policy they have.

Re:I know a faster way to get customers into a pla

[PolygamousRanchKid]

3) Pump the slurry into the plane as it drains from the pan

"This is your Captain, speaking . . . the meal on today's flight will be Soylent Green."

Re:Who wants to get on first? Parents

[Anonymous Coward]

When you have an infant or child in time, time is at a premium to get in and get the kid acclimated and settled for everyone's sanity. Sure you could go back to golden days of airfare and not have kids...

Mom or Dad wanders up the aisle to find an overhead bin and you risk a meltdown. Parent has to travel 10-15 rows to get a diaper or toy?

No, let a parent get on and settled faster so the kid can get their food and go to sleep.

If it *really* was a priority? More doors!

[King_TJ]

If you think about it, all of these airplanes have "emergency exits" in parts of the plane other than near the cockpit in front. So you could utilize at least one of those near the rear of the plane during boarding -- if you redesigned the boarding platforms at the terminal gates to work with them.

Then you could simultaneously have people board on both sides of the plane, filling in the rows in the middle first and working towards either end.

But THAT would require a lot more expense -- so I doubt you'll ever see such a thing.

Re:If it *really* was a priority? More doors!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well of course it's more expensive. Modifying ramps, modifying aircraft, reducing the number of seats on smaller aircraft. What is the advantage here that would make it more profitable, just to save a few extra minutes of boarding. They do this on some larger aircraft at some airports and it doesn't improve things all that much except first class is separated from steerage so economy class doesn't have to walk through first class.

It would have been better to just regulate the damn prices between airports to allow airlines to compete on quality and comfort not bargain basement service that is akin to riding a bus. But Democrat Jimmy Carter ended that practice. Sure prices are cheap all right but you can't complain that you paid for fast food when you really wanted steak and lobster for the same low low price. Forget it suck it up and deal with it as it is.

What people are really complaining about is that poor people can now afford to fly so they are jammed in with the middle class and it's downgraded the whole thing. It's more egalitarian, but then do you really want to sit next to the fattest woman just to save a few bucks? I would rather pay more.

Re:If it *really* was a priority? More doors!

[sconeu]

That's one of the great things about Burbank Airport (BUR). You board from both the front and the rear, because there are no jetways. Same for deplaning. So if you're flying SJC => BUR, you can grab (Southwest) or book a seat to the rear for easy deplaning.

Re:If it *really* was a priority? More doors!

[eth1]

I've actually been on Southwest flights that do this. They open the back door, and roll up some stairs, then they announce that you can go out this door and use the jetway to board from the front, or go out that door, walk to the plane and board from the back.

Sedate 'em and stack 'em like cordwood

[dmatos]

Hell, I'd pay a premium to be sedated in the departures lounge, stacked in a tiny coffin on the plane, and woken up at my destination. Load me in any damn order you like once I'm unconscious.

Re:Sedate 'em and stack 'em like cordwood

[angel'o'sphere]

But then you miss the movies you could not afford to watch in the cinema! (in terms of time, obviously)

Re:Sedate 'em and stack 'em like cordwood

[Anonymous Coward]

don't give Ryanair ideas.

Re: Trump will send Hillary to PRISON

[tripleevenfall]

Back on topic, I wish they would crack down universally on people who somehow manage to carry on 4-6 different items, at least one of which is oversized, when "One carry-on and one personal item" is clearly stated, and then cram it all into the overhead.

"But that's my carry-on. And my personal item is this conglomeration of a huge tote and a purse and a laptop bag and a diaper bag and a pillow and a large coat and a satchel that I'm going to shove into the overhead"

Re: Trump will send Hillary to PRISON

[Anonymous Coward]

The blatant disregard for the rules is sad, but the airlines permit people to get away with it.

Re:I know a faster way to get customers into a pla

[msauve]

I think Spirit Airlines has a process patent.

Re:Who wants to get on first? Parents

[swillden]

No, let a parent get on and settled faster so the kid can get their food and go to sleep.

Every airline I've ever flown already does this. Parents with kids get to board before anyone else, including first class.

Lufthansa & Air France

[js290]

Lufthansa & Air France board optimally: back to front.

Re: Trump will send Hillary to PRISON

[Anonymous Coward]

Back on topic, I wish they would crack down universally on people who somehow manage to carry on 4-6 different items, at least one of which is oversized, when "One carry-on and one personal item" is clearly stated, and then cram it all into the overhead.

"But that's my carry-on. And my personal item is this conglomeration of a huge tote and a purse and a laptop bag and a diaper bag and a pillow and a large coat and a satchel that I'm going to shove into the overhead"

On vacations I travel with hands free. Buy clothes and stuff at the destination. And I'm 1,80 m tall, 75 kg. They should pay me to board their planes.

Companies seem to love inefficiency

[wardrich86]

Look at grocery stores... one line per checkout, means you're fucked if you get stuck behind somebody that needs a price check, or is price matching everything in their buggy. One long line that feeds into the individual checkouts would be way WAY faster. But will we see it? Nope. If something that simple can't even be done properly, I doubt airlines will ever figure out efficiency.

Re:Companies seem to love inefficiency

[denbesten]

One long line that feeds into the individual checkouts would be way WAY faster. But will we see it? Nope.

Around me, Best Buy and a few other stores do exactly that.

Re:Companies seem to love inefficiency

[Anonymous Coward]

Banks have been doing this since, well, as long as I can remember (which is half-a-century). I guess you are a young-un who has never been to a bank?

Re:Companies seem to love inefficiency

[ezelkow1]

what surprises me is when people insist on enforcing the bad method. Multiple times Ive been at a line to get lunch (at a sub shop) where most people do a single line to feed to 2 registers. However multiple times Ive had someone behind me ask which line Im in, to which I respond 'whichever opens up first'

Just seems odd to me people cant get simple efficiency concepts, but its usually that 'me first' attitude that brings that out in them

Re: Trump will send Hillary to PRISON

[bws111]

So you're Allen Iverson?

Re:Who wants to get on first? Parents

[Night Goat]

Every airline I've ever flown already does this. Parents with kids get to board before anyone else, including first class.

I used to think this was standard as well. Then, two years ago, I had the misfortune of trying to bring my two-year-old to Hawaii. United Airlines does not let parents with small children board first! I recommend not flying with them.

Re:I know a faster way to get customers into a pla

[drinkypoo]

1) Walk the customers through a propeller
2) Collect the slurry in a pan

That doesn't get customers onto the plane, that gets customer slurry onto the plane. But let me share with you my plan for using hydraulic trash compactors...

Won't fly!

[no-body]

The US cast system needs to stay intact!

1 - Let the rich - highest cast - in and start at the front, then enjoying their flight by getting spoiled with drinks comfy in lots of leg space.

2 - Economy - 2. newcomers and cheapos parade by the first class which then can show off their superiority to all the passer by's and feel proud of themselves.

3 - Losers and not getting their act together parading all their failure by the selected few at the smallest front compartment into their crowded chicken coop sized destinations....

This is the law of the land - don't touch it!

Re:Won't fly!

[Anonymous Coward]

If you want to look a little less stupid making your lefty rant, at least learn how to spell caste.

Overhead Bins

[tquasar]

I put my bag in the first bin to my left as soon as I board. It doesn't belong to anyone. I pack light, you can buy what you need at your destination. Some people are too territorial about the space on a plane, enjoy the flight and your crowded, cramped time in the air.

Re:Overhead Bins

[Obfuscant]

I put my bag in the first bin to my left as soon as I board. It doesn't belong to anyone.

That first bin is almost always at a bulkhead where there is no under-seat storage available. The passengers seated there have no place but the overhead to put their carry-ons, no matter how small they are. You've filled up their overhead space because "it doesn't belong to anyone" just so you don't have to spend your time looking for space near your seat, meaning they may have to spend time searching for space that is well behind them -- and slowing down the boarding for everyone while they do it. And slowing down the unboarding as they have to go against the flow of traffic to get their stuff.

That sounds pretty selfish to me. Why not just carry your things with you to your seat and use the space there?

Re:Overhead Bins

[LynnwoodRooster]

Obviously you don't fly that much, since most planes would have either a toilet or the cockpit to your left when you step on board...

Re:Overhead Bins

[tquasar]

You are correct, my mistake.

Re:Overhead Bins

[Anonymous Coward]

So you're the one always standing in the aisle right at the front of the plane stopping everyone else from boarding, good job.

Anyone remember . . . . .

[lfp98]

. . . . when they used to board beginning at the back of the plane? That at least made sense - you didn't have to crawl over people settling into the seats in the front. Now they still board by "zones", but it's not zones, it's nothing to do with zones, it's solely a question of status.

If bottom line

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't an issue why not just give everyone their own private jet. I bet boarding would be quicker then.

Re: Trump will send Hillary to PRISON

[Anonymous Coward]

WORDS how do they wurkl

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

No difference in the end

[PCeye]

I don't know about other airlines. I don't travel often (1-6 times/yr). Air Canada mandates all electronics, and encourage passengers to carry valuables and medications in carry-on. For me, it means a full carry bag with laptop, electronic odds and sods, medications, and documents no matter if they were to offer free baggage check, or some funky boarding scheme. Your results may vary.

Modular Pods

[Anonymous Coward]

Steel containers revolutionized shipping. Boats used to wait for longshoremen to carefully pack odd shaped items. Modular containers streamlined the process and reduced turnaround time for boats.

Design new airplanes that just have hollow tubes and large hatches on the side. Quickly load and unload pre-boarded module pods of people and cargo. When you arrive at the airport, pre-board your designated pod. When planes arrive, just swap pods to improve turnaround time.

Airlines currently have to compute how much passenger space is 1st class, coach, etc. Sometimes they guess wrong and lose money on wasted 1st class space that could not be filled. With modular pods you can mix and match classes of pods to fill the plane more precisely based on tickets actually sold.

Each pod can have its own parachute and controlled atmosphere, and be safely ejected in emergencies. So safety also improves.

Same pods can also be attached to trains or buses, the same way cargo containers can be transferred onto big rig trucks or trains.

Standardized checked luggage

[edi_guy]

As pretty much everyone has known for years, the major problem surrounds checked baggage. First that airlines charge you for checked bags, so everyone tries to bring only carry-on, and second because with some degree of frequency collecting your checked bag can take anywhere from 30 minutes to eternity.

I have always wondered why the airlines and plane manufacturers didn't get together to create a standard checked bag form factor. A plastic hardshell case such is currently popular, with both embedded RFID and barcodes. Normal conveniences such as 4 wheels, extending handle, etc. Designed in such a way that loading and unloading can be nearly fully automated, similar to what you see used on cargo jets. If you use one of their cases, your bags are guaranteed to be at the carousel 15 minutes after the passenger door is opened upon landing. If you so desperately need to use your calvin klein designer luggage you wait.

The RFID tags also allow them to weigh the bags and charge the passenger accordingly. If my case only weighs 20 lbs and Aunt Bee's bag weighs in at 49.9 lbs, she pays more. Personally I would actually pay the extra $10-$25 tax for a checked bag if I knew I could get it back quickly at baggage claim,

Re:Standardized checked luggage

[CWCheese]

The idea of barcodes was attempted 20 years ago at the then brand new Denver International Airport (DIA). The designers came up with an extraordinary plan to reduce the need for baggage handlers by building a sophisticated underground cart system, which looked kind of like a roller coaster, which could read the barcodes of the luggage tags and route each cart to the proper baggage carousel inside the main terminal while passengers deplaned and rode the underground train to the main terminal. In theory, passengers and baggage would arrive at nearly same time, reducing the wait.

The system failed.

Firstly, only United Airlines was using it as this was part of their deal to get faster than the competition, so none of the other carriers were involved at the start. Then, the roller coaster carts began to mis-deliver the baggage. The final problem was the instances of lost baggage due to bags falling out of the carts in transit and getting stuck in the underground areas. As you may imagine, not all of the dropped bags landed on the floor, some became lodged in the tracks and motors, causing the entire system to halt continually. After a few years, United and DIA declared the experiment over and turned it off, restaffing the baggage handlers who drive the luggage back to the main terminal.

Re:Standardized checked luggage

[CWCheese]

P.S. They actually tried to make it work for 10 years before throwing in the towel.

Re:Standardized checked luggage

[djinn6]

So you're telling me those automated Amazon warehouses I hear about on the news don't actually exist?

The fastest way to board planes

[John.Banister]

The departing seating module is in the gate waiting area, with polycarbonate rounded sides raised like gull wings. Customers board in parallel, stowing luggage in compartments above and below the seats. A few minutes before the plane arrives at the gate, the final boarding call process occurs, and the polycarbonate sides slowly close and latch. Then the plane lands, the arriving seating module is removed, the departing seating module is inserted into the plane, and the plane takes off again. Meanwhile, the arriving seating module is placed in the gate waiting area. The sides raise, and customers exit in parallel. People who forget something go back and check, as the seating module will be there for a while. The module is cleaned and readied for boarding prior to the next departure. Efficiency people love how the boarding and waiting-at-the-gate times are combined. Airline profit watchers love how little time the planes spend on the ground.

Re:The fastest way to board planes

[Obfuscant]

Airline profit watchers love how little time the planes spend on the ground.

And they really love how the extra weight increases fuel costs, and how the complexity increases maintenance costs. And how the lawsuits pile up the first time one of these new modern aircraft crash lands and the people can't get out fast enough because they're trapped in a "polycarbonate capsule".

Re:The fastest way to board planes

[John.Banister]

There would be no need for the passenger module to have a front or a back end while it's on board the aircraft, emergency exiting could easily be the same as for current aircraft.

Re:The fastest way to board planes

[Dynedain]

Right, and removing half of the middle of a plane wouldn't have any effect on structural integrity or weight.

Re:The fastest way to board planes

[John.Banister]

As with every other aircraft, aircraft designed to do this job would need to be designed in such a manner as to do it successfully. One possibility is that the plane could open up like an AN-124 and the passenger modules could be loaded longitudinally.

carry ons, baggage claim

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is, that the *business* travelers, for the most part want carry off. And, they want to get off first. And they're willing to pay the most.

If baggage claim could guarantee that the biz people's bags would be waiting for them , and never lose bags, why would a biz traveler then want to board first, as long as his laptop bag can always get on.

The running out of overhead bag space is a business risk that biz travelers cannot take.

So taken myopically, sure, they could board sooner, but just not gonna happen.

Here's an idea

[edxwelch]

Save time by start taxiing towards the runway as soon as the pilots are on board. The passengers run alongside the plane and clamber onto the boarding stairs as it moves. The taxiing is actually quite slow and if the passengers were fit enough they could easily make it before take off.

Re:Who wants to get on first? Parents

[aardvarkjoe]

Then, two years ago, I had the misfortune of trying to bring my two-year-old to Hawaii.

Just "trying to"? What, when you found out that they wouldn't let you board first, did you just leave your kid at the airport?

Re:Who wants to get on first? Parents

[Bender0x7D1]

Every airline I've ever flown already does this. Parents with kids get to board before anyone else, including first class.

Southwest boards families between their "A" and "B" groups.

The overall order of boarding is: Preboards (wheelchairs, etc.); "A"; Families (A single parent and children under 6, I believe) and A-List members who didn't get an "A" on their boarding pass; "B"; then "C".

There are 60 people in the "A" and "B" categories.

Why are people still boarding planes?

[pubwvj]

Since the teleportation booths were invented I thought everyone had abandoned using trains, planes and cars. Huh...!

Re: Trump will send Hillary to PRISON

[Anonymous Coward]

"Back on topic, I wish they would crack down universally on people who somehow manage to carry on 4-6 different items, at least one of which is oversized, "

I always find it funny on the plane to the US from Europe, when I see each and every time a dozen clueless people checking their carefully packed fruitcakes, hams, and other illegal foodstuff that will be taken away by customs and thrown in huge waste-bins anyway.

I'm always making sure to be behind them in the customs like to see their shocked faces when the cakes get wrestled away from them.

Re:Who wants to get on first? Parents

[rwa2]

Ugh, never fly United... most of their airline staff are old and cranky... also they have the highest unaccompanied minor charges ... $150 on top of the ticket up to the age of 16 or something ridiculous like that.

It's difficult to fly to some smaller airports without using United, though :/

Re: Trump will send Hillary to PRISON

[nospam007]

"On vacations I travel with hands free. Buy clothes and stuff at the destination."

I just send my stuff in robust Aluminum cases to the hotel and back beforehand with UPS.
A Jacket with 20 pockets and cargo pants does the rest.
Don't forget the belt with no metal pieces and no.lace slippers and you'll travel fine.

Also, with no checked luggage, you'll be first at the taxi line when you leave the airport.

Re:I know a faster way to get customers into a pla

[Anonymous Coward]

1) Walk the customers through a propeller
2) Collect the slurry in a pan
3) Pump the slurry into the plane as it drains from the pan

This is what would happen if you told an AI: "Customers feel uncomfortable and cramped while riding the plane. Fix the problem."

Simple: Everyone needs to not be an a$$ for 15min

[Anonymous Coward]

I was a traveling consultant for years and was regularly taking 4-6+ flights a week. The vast majority of boarding issues are caused by people being self-absorbed jerks, taking far more than than they should be allowed as carry ons(*), bringing bull-shit "service" animals(**), blocking aisles while they arrange their little nest, camping in the aisle seat when passengers need to get to their seats and generally just acting like the $500 they paid for a seat on a 200 seat $50 million plane makes it "their" plane and expecting it to take off 5secs after they sit down. About the only good thing about passengers acting like this is it generally makes getting an upgrade or other services easier because all you have to do is go to airline staff and act like a decent human being, ask politely and be patient. Before I had gold/platinum status I regularly got bumped up by staff who knew me (and it went both ways, they knew they could ask to bump me down or off and I wouldn't freak out about it.. being single at the time made that a lot easier).

* The airlines are also at fault for not enforcing this but I understand it to some point because half the passengers blow up and make a scene when questions. Regardless, they make it painfully obvious what's allowed and what's not verbally and in writing several times. If you ignore that, you're the cause.
** I understand some people truly need service animals (e.g. the blind) but the system is flagrantly and massively abused.

It's all about perks

[Chelloveck]

The reason airlines won't change boarding is because they'd no longer be able to give out "in the early boarding group" as a perk of having lots of frequent flier miles or whatever. Changing boarding order would mean that they can no longer give out an intangible benefit that costs them nothing.

Fix the ratio of time flying to everything else

[Kris_J]

How about just trying to reduce the overhead of everything that isn't sitting in a moving plane?

This is pretty much only a poor country problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Poor people (such as Asians, Indians and Americans) frequently try to board their budget carriers with as much carry on as possible so they dont have to pay the pittance to check more luggage.

Its amazing the difference between flying in poor areas as opposed to more affluent nations such as Germany, Australia or Norway. Even the short haul domestic flights have better behaved people who aren't trying to bring 3 shoddy suitcases on board.

I suppose it's all relative though. $25 is obviously a lot to an Indian or American. It might make the difference between eating that day or not.

I can see why they'd want to limit their costs as much as possible.

Re: This is pretty much only a poor country proble

[Anonymous Coward]

You missed out that in the more economically disadvantaged places like India and the US if you check your carry on there's a good chance the luggage handlers will steal it.

I've had friends who have travelled to the Philippines and the United States who had expensive electronic equipment stolen from their carry on AND their checked luggage by the handlers and the checkpoint security people.

Apparently it's quite common.

Yep but Ad-Hoc + alternate exist faster

[SuperKendall]

The Southwest study only covered everyone always going in through the same entrance.

Ad-Hoc is the fastest of all possible mechanisms currently in place (from experience across many planes). However I am 100% sure Ad-Hoc combined with exiting out the opposite side of the entrance would be faster, because on the many, many Southwest flights I've ever been on people pack up the front rows first and that always slows boarding. If they were mostly packing up the rows on the other end of the plane from where everyone enters, it would increase speed of loading quite a bit...

Of course, the real issue there is would be a huge change for the gate staff, who would have to be told which end of the plane to hook up to, or possibly half the gates could be set to rear attach, half to front and the airplane could go to the right gate... either way a big change for airports, so it would probably never happen even if all the airlines wanted to do it.

Re:I know a faster way to get customers into a pla

[green1]

It's also a pain to get the customers entirely out of the plane afterwards, some of those customers really stick to the carpet.

Re:

[kurkosdr]

Well that class system allows me to fly from the UK to Greece and back for only £250, so I like the class system someone else built and the commies can fly AeroFlot of they want.

Re: Trump will send Hillary to PRISON

[Anonymous Coward]

there you go, travel AND fashion advice on /.

Clueless author

[thegarbz]

The author doesn't realise all the proposed "fixes" are already in place in airlines all over the world and have done absolutely nothing to make the experience better. I could have checked my carryon today, but why would I? The cost is nothing compared to the 30min wait when I get to my destination for the bag to come out.

I actually like the process some airlines have where they tag your carry on if you checked a bag. The tag guarantees you can put it in the overhead bin with priority over someone who hasn't checked a bag. Make the people who are cheaping out suffer a bit.

I was on a flight to London last week and some lady came in with her thick carry on crammed over head and then proceeded to put her duty free, and her coat under the seat. She then turned to me with a pleading look with her handbag and motioned to my leg space "Do you mind?". "Yes I do, stay away from my space." She seemed shocked that someone wouldn't give up their space for a self-obsessed asshat who refused to check a bag.

*Posted from Heathrow Terminal 5. (Still a shithole).

Lift beds in...

[jago25_98]

Well you could split the sides out and forklift modular beds straight in designed from a 3rd party. Horizontal bedding would allow many more seats

Backwards Bags policies.

[wirehead_rick]

Charge to bring carry-on. Make checked bags free.

They will make more money and boarding will go infinitely faster.

Idiots.

Re: Trump will send Hillary to PRISON

[LynnwoodRooster]

Yes, how DARE he simply execute the Jerusalem Embassy Act passed in 1995, and strongly reaffirmed last year by 90-0 vote in the Senate! How DARE he follow the law and recognize the will of the Senate!

Eww.

[Anonymous Coward]

I farted.

Allow more home office work

[Anonymous Coward]

Sadly we could eliminate a lot of this BS (at least for business flyers) if more "managers" weren't "Micro Managers" and needed "face time" for everyone working on projects that could be performed remotely.

Case in point - Kaiser Permanente has a tech job I am particularly suited for that every headhunter on the f**king planet has been calling me about for MONTHS. No, I do NOT want to relocate to Silver Springs, Maryland. NO I do not want to jump on a plane every damn week to sit in a stuffy cube, drink your weak coffee and use some corporate-supplied POS laptop that timed out for Windows 7 almost a decade ago. I'd be more than happy though to snarf the laptop image and run it on my fully encrypted RedHat beast laptop, my MacBook Pro or similarly powered Windows 10 laptop packed with SSD's running VMWare and Docker images.

My advice? Learn how to use a webcam, Skype and how VPN's work and I could outperform any functoid you have sitting in your cube-farm that wastes time attending agenda-less meetings all day just to hear your suit-n-tie clowns prattle on loving the sound of their own voice.

Until the "If I can't see you, you're not working" mindset goes away? Travel will still be the bane of every tech consultant alive.

Trump eats junk food on his private plane.

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump flies around on our dollar and stuffs his fat face with junk food. Trump has always been a scammer and bully. Ha canâ(TM)t fix shit. All you losers who voted for him were scammed. Trump never worked a day in his life. Get back to your shitty jobs working for some selfish rich family who barely pays you to live while Trump spends your money on himself!!!!

bag status updaes

[Anonymous Coward]

Delta does this - with their online app, you can see your bags making their way through the system as the barcode is scanned at various places, including being loaded on and taken off the plane.

Charge for OVERHEAD space not checked bags!

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly passengers value overhead space way more than checked space. CHARGE for it, and charge even more for space over your seat. Or, charge for both? Why havenâ(TM)t any airlines tried this? Also, on a lighter note, why not charge by human dimension and weight, like a shipping company? Heavier, larger people take up more space (scarce resource) and require more fuel. Anyone?

Charge for OVERHEAD Space

[chatteronstocks]

When a resource is scarce and desired, CHARGE for it by weight! Seems to me like travelers value overhead space more than checked space, charge accordingly! Charge even more for the space actually over your seat! The airlines will make more money and fewer travelers will bring huge heavy wheelies into the cabin! Boarding will be much faster!

Charge Customers Like Shippersâ"Dimensions an

[chatteronstocks]

The airlines are in the human shipping business. Larger humans cost more than smaller. Heavy objects consume more jet fuel. Weigh and measure each human like Fedex or UPS, stick a readable bar code on each passengerâ(TM)s neck, scan on entry. Route each human to appropriate storage area. Tranquilize if necessary or requested.

Loading fast

[Anonymous Coward]

They just need some common sense, load the back of the plane first, then move forward for the next victims of cigar tube hell. Then when its time to disembark, just like an ammo clip, the ones in the front get out first. Oh, but wait, that wouldn't be allowed because first class must be seated first so they can gloat at all those in third class steerage as they push their way back.

Vanity is illogical.

Re:Who wants to get on first? Parents

[Spectra72]

They reverted that policy long ago. More than two years ago for sure. There was a time they experimented with not allowing families with kids, but it didn't last long.

Military, disabilities, parents traveling with small children...all get early pre-board on United.

It's all on their website

https://www.united.com/web/en-...

Re:Who wants to get on first? Parents

[Carewolf]

No, let a parent get on and settled faster so the kid can get their food and go to sleep.

Every airline I've ever flown already does this. Parents with kids get to board before anyone else, including first class.

Which the SLOWEST possible way to board. They should be boarding last.

Mythbusters tested this once...

[xenobyte]

Almost as efficient as the military style back-to-front column loading were the back-to-front row loading. As families usually sit in the same row or clustered around a few rows, they would be able to board almost as the same time, and exceptions to the boarding order could be made with very little cost. Flight attendants would be on hand ensuring that people stow the carry-on either at their seat or further back. This way the usual road blocks could be avoided: The people boarding early due to special seating (business, children etc.) blocking the rest with oversized luggage, obnoxious children, excessive comfort maneuvers with coats (taking several layers of coats off one at a time, folding, and storing in various bins) etc. and similar when deplaning where the same people either run around looking for their extra luggage stored in bins several rows back or forward.

My usual boarding method is this: Go to seat, put carry-on nearest overhead bin. I've already taken out the stuff I'll need on the plane and put it into my coat pockets at the gate, so I just sit down with my coat on. When all has boarded, I stand up, take out the stuff I needed from my pockets, take off the coat and put it in the bin. If I'm not at the aisle I'll ask for the aisle person to help. There's almost always room in the nearest bin as a coat is much more flexible than a bag.

Re:Who wants to get on first? Parents

[Anonymous Coward]

Every airline I've ever flown already does this. Parents with kids get to board before anyone else, including first class.

I used to think this was standard as well. Then, two years ago, I had the misfortune of trying to bring my two-year-old to Hawaii. United Airlines does not let parents with small children board first! I recommend not flying with them.

The Two-Year-Olds or United?

Load the back first...

[autlycus]

It seems to me, that it would be quicker to have the people sitting in the back be the first ones on. Then you don't have everyone stopping at the front of the plane.

Re:Who wants to get on first? Parents

[Anonymous Coward]

United Airlines does not let parents with small children board first!

Missinformation.