Economy seat size

[ComeFlyWithMe]

'Market forces' allowed banks to cause an economic collapse that taxpayers are now paying for - as such we had the introduction of the Dodd-Frank act and more stringent lending criteria for consumers. Someone please tell me why the government should be getting involved with this when consumers were happy to take out massive loans and banks were happy to swap and pass on junk debt to their compatriots? What right does the government have to tell a person how much they are allowed to borrow - surely the banks should be trusted and market forces should be followed? If bank is happy to lend 95% to a low income earner at high interest rates what right does the Government have to enforce lending requirements?

Some may say this if off-topic but it is here to make a point that there should be limits to what big industry can offer to consumers.

OT, but it was the lack of banking regulation in the USA that allowed it to take place.

I'm usually on the side of less regulation but some industries should be the exception.

 

[Tortuga]

OT, but it was the lack of banking regulation in the USA that allowed it to take place.

I'm usually on the side of less regulation but some industries should be the exception.

I agree. Current regulations might suggest that the current economy seat offerings are safe (I'm sure they only care about a crash/evacuation situation) - I would argue long term/long haul in these seats presents a higher risk of DVT and muscular/back issues. I'm yet to see any reported cases of passengers developing DVT or muscular pain because they did not have access to the latest Batman movie. These health issues are made worse by the fact that we are told to stay seated unless going to the bathroom for our own safety. The airline industry has extremely high entry costs for new participants similar to banking and thus can get away with product offerings below what would usually be accepted by the general public. Competition is severely lacking in many regions.

The fact that some senators who are in the back pocket of the airline industry voted against the proposal is laughable at best - I'm not expecting business class seats tomorrow for the same price and I understand there would be an extra cost component. The regulation requested a ban on making seats even smaller which I fully support. Humans are getting bigger (either by weight or natural size) and as such seat offerings should have a minimum size to promote safety and comfort for the consumer. Like I said - sometimes the consumer cannot appreciate what is in their best interest and regulation should be there to prevent companies abusing their situation.

 

[Lemon_Party]

I'm not even sure SQ flies the 772 in to Australia (except maybe for the new CBR flight).

I flew one of these SIN-PER in Jan. I think 1 or 2 of the Perth flights a day are on the 772.

IFE boxes on some airlines are a big issue for me in Y. On SQ on some flights (332s?) there are 3 per row and it takes up almost half the footwell.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I flew one of these SIN-PER in Jan. I think 1 or 2 of the Perth flights a day are on the 772.

Oh yeah! I - like Qantas - completely forgot about Perth!!

 

[cambriamarsh]

OT, but it was the lack of banking regulation in the USA that allowed it to take place.

I'm usually on the side of less regulation but some industries should be the exception.

I'm also usually regulation lite but when there are serious collateral effects there's got to be some oversight otherwise we go back to serious boom followed by very serious bust when the banks get nervous. Maybe I'm becoming more nuanced as I mature.

 

[russ]

... there should be limits to what big industry can offer to consumers.

Sure, but if a customer is prepared to have a smaller seat to save some money, why should the government stop them?

 

[JohnK]

I agree. Current regulations might suggest that the current economy seat offerings are safe (I'm sure they only care about a crash/evacuation situation) - I would argue long term/long haul in these seats presents a higher risk of DVT and muscular/back issues. I'm yet to see any reported cases of passengers developing DVT or muscular pain because they did not have access to the latest Batman movie. These health issues are made worse by the fact that we are told to stay seated unless going to the bathroom for our own safety.

There is nothing stopping you from taking a slow walk around the cabin. I do it at least 2-3 times a flight. Some times more. Take a walk down the back. Ask for drink. Walk back to the toilets. Pretend you are waiting to use toilet. On a 747 or A380 I can hide down the back galley longer as the crew is busy most times.

 

[Quickstatus]

Higher risk of DVT?.

The economy class syndrome has been debunked several years ago.

The cramped seat is not associated with an increased risk of DVT. The main cause of DVT is not the seat but immobility. JohnK is correct and the DVT prevention strategies promulgated by the airlines do help.

Sitting in a window seat is associated with greater immobility and therefore DVT.
Dehydration and alcohol does not either unless associated with immobility.

Get a cheap Best fare of day seat but do as JohnK says - move

Other factors associated with DVT are:

• Having a history of blood clots or having cancer
• Having a known thrombophilic disorder -- a medical disorder that predisposes you to forming blood clots
• Undergoing a recent surgery
• Use of oral contraceptives or other estrogen treatments
• Pregnancy
• Obesity
• Sitting in a window seat if this prevents getting up and moving around

 

[drewbles]

If you're anything above a size 12, there is a big watch out on the older plane Air NZ use as NZ105 for AKL - SYD (or did as recently as 8 weeks ago) when selecting Y seat.

The bulkhead seat is a narrow seat and then they have added the IFE controls so it narrows the seat even further.

Interesting. NZ105 is operated by the 767's which have a far more generous seat pitch/width than the A320's they put on MEL-AKL. Older, yes, but i'd take that any day over their sardine-like A320's (I refuse to fly them).

 

[Quickstatus]

Found it :


http://www.sci.utah.edu/~macleod/travel/docs/BCSHTravelGuideline.pdf

the key summary point is risk of travel related DVT is very low ~ 0.5%

Page 8

 

[Tortuga]

Sure, but if a customer is prepared to have a smaller seat to save some money, why should the government stop them?

The same reason banks aren't allowed to lend with minimal deposit to low income earners who would happily accept their offer. It might only effect that 1 person but when it happens on large scale it can bring down the whole economy.

I have no problem with an individual wanting to sit in a 2ft box in cargo hold if it cost them $20, but their decision is having a major negative effect on every other normal size person who wishes to fly in some degree of comfort and not pain. Do people not have a right to be comfortable while travelling without having to pay double the price? There needs to be a solution in the middle - not everything is 1's and 0's.

You might say I am denying those with less money the right to travel - I disagree and think there is a solution that will not cost so much more to make this happen. Less money in Wifi more money in passenger comfort. I would rather not have neck pain than watch the latest hollywood film.

 

[Quickstatus]

The same reason banks aren't allowed to lend with minimal deposit to low income earners who would happily accept their offer. It might only effect that 1 person but when it happens on large scale it can bring down the whole economy.

I have no problem with an individual wanting to sit in a 2ft box in cargo hold if it cost them $20, but their decision is having a major negative effect on every other normal size person who wishes to fly in some degree of comfort and not pain. Do people not have a right to be comfortable while travelling without having to pay double the price? There needs to be a solution in the middle - not everything is 1's and 0's.

You might say I am denying those with less money the right to travel - I disagree and think there is a solution that will not cost so much more to make this happen. Less money in Wifi more money in passenger comfort. I would rather not have neck pain than watch the latest hollywood film.

Therein lies the problem

We all want to sit in Y+ but not pay Y+ prices. There is nothing wrong with what you seek. In each cabin there would be a distribution of passengers according to seat expectations and the price they are prepared to pay.

Lets take Y as an example.
Some would have paid more but not as much as W for extra space (otherwise they would be in W)
Some would be prepared to pay more only for exit row seats
some would not have paid any more if given the opportunity of paying for extra space.
Some would have paid less but wanted or had to travel with that particular airline

The current practice of Upgrade bidding illustrates what people are prepared to pay for upgraded seats. Unfortunately we are not privy to that data and it would be very interesting to see what people are actually prepared to pay. I suspect most are not prepared to pay much and many will not even take part.

The rise and rise of LCC with Y-negative seats demonstrate that the majority of passengers are price driven in the negative direction

It may be correct to assume that if the minimum seat size is to be W (premium economy) that competition will reduce the current price of W (which has a premium price attached to it as it is less of a commodity than a Y seat). But by how much?

 

[wandering_fred]

Therein lies the problem
We all want to sit in Y+ but not pay Y+ prices. There is nothing wrong with what you seek. In each cabin there would be a distribution of passengers according to seat expectations and the price they are prepared to pay.
...

Well actually I don't mind sitting in Y if the Y prices are reasonable. The geographic nature of fare definition is the issue. Consider the price of Y fares exAUS versus Y fares exUSA at the moment.

As for Y+, double the offered Y fares is a bit "rich" when space an amenities are considered.

YMMV as with all wandering

Fred

 

[Quickstatus]

I wonder how many W (premium econ passengers) have come from J and from Y.

Im sure W caters for a small segment but not all of the segment who are prepared to pay a little more for a better seat than just an exit row. How should airlines tap into this segment?

DL has attempted in some ways to do this with their comfort plus. However it's a seat plus some extras. Tortuga suggests that getting rid of these enhancements may reduce the prices.