Passengers kicked off flight over seat recline spat

[JohnK]

It's not just the recliners, everyone who sat in them whinged that those seats were uncomfortable.

I didn't get a chance to sit in those seats so cannot comment.

The seat mentioned by dajop up thread sounds OK. Not quite a shell seat but the seat slides back and forward utililing your own space instead of reclining.

Use at your hearts content anytime you like instead of asking people to compromise on something they loathe.

 

[TomVexille]

The seat mentioned by dajop up thread sounds OK. Not quite a shell seat but the seat slides back and forward utililing your own space instead of reclining.

Use at your hearts content anytime you like instead of asking people to compromise on something they loathe.

But even these seats recline (although not quite as much). I take it you're okay with people using them as intended then.

 

[BadgerBoi]

I didn't get a chance to sit in those seats so cannot comment.

The seat mentioned by dajop up thread sounds OK. Not quite a shell seat but the seat slides back and forward utililing your own space instead of reclining.

Again, those seats were universally condemned by recliners and non-recliners alike.

Use at your hearts content anytime you like instead of asking people to compromise on something they loathe.

?

 

[JohnK]

Again, those seats were universally condemned by recliners and non-recliners alike.

Post #149 sounds like it is a new design. Not shell seat. Sounds like a possible compromise. No?

Otherwise allow me to sit in economy with full use of all the features I paid for without me needing to recline.

 

[TomVexille]

Again, those seats were universally condemned by recliners and non-recliners alike.



?

Post #149 sounds like it is a new design. Not shell seat. Sounds like a possible compromise. No?

Otherwise allow me to sit in economy with full use of all the features I paid for without me needing to recline.

It's sort of a compromise between the two.

Seat reclines a little, and the bottom slides forward a little. I'm okay with it as you don't get as much of the seat in front in your face but you can still recline. Although if you chose to do so it is at the expense of some of your knee room.

 

[dajop]

It's sort of a compromise between the two.

Seat reclines a little, and the bottom slides forward a little. I'm okay with it as you don't get as much of the seat in front in your face but you can still recline. Although if you chose to do so it is at the expense of some of your knee room.

This is it exactly. It is very common on newer long haul aircraft (I know SQ & MH have it), although unless looking closely at it, many would not notice the subtle slide forward, or even that it doesn't recline as far as older seats - but I've certainly noticed the seats in front don't seem to be as "in your face" as many older style seats.

 

[suze2000]

I've tried them recently and they are still as hard on your back as the ones that tilt up. Awful design that I cannot utilise.

 

[blackcat20]

QF have them on the A380 in Y; when you recline the base moves forward. It's not a new thing...

 

[BadgerBoi]

Post #149 sounds like it is a new design. Not shell seat. Sounds like a possible compromise. No?

Otherwise allow me to sit in economy with full use of all the features I paid for without me needing to recline.

If you're not reclining then, of course, you're not using all the features that you paid for.

 

[Moody]

To recline is to sleep - and I can help you with that!

 

[whatmeworry]

I guess if PAX keep fighting over reclining seats, Airlines will have no choice to get rid of them as all this diverting will mean having reclining seats in Y is too costly.

 

[TomVexille]

I guess if PAX keep fighting over reclining seats, Airlines will have no choice to get rid of them as all this diverting will mean having reclining seats in Y is too costly.

If I was the airline (or their insurance company) I would be looking at recovering the cost of the diversion from the pax that caused it (obviously not in the case of a medical diversion).

 

[BAM1748]

If I was the airline (or their insurance company) I would be looking at recovering the cost of the diversion from the pax that caused it (obviously not in the case of a medical diversion).

Be close to impossible to do, who decided they needed to divert, it wasn't either passenger. How much would an airline be prepared to spend with an unknown chance of recovery plus a chance of having to pay the other parties costs.

A part of doing business I'm afraid.

It would be much more straight forward to recover costs from a medical diversion.

Matt

 

[TomVexille]

Be close to impossible to do, who decided they needed to divert, it wasn't either passenger. How much would an airline be prepared to spend with an unknown chance of recovery plus a chance of having to pay the other parties costs.

A part of doing business I'm afraid.

It would be much more straight forward to recover costs from a medical diversion.

Matt

The decision to divert ultimately would be up to the PIC I think. However I don't think this decision is ever made lightly. Each recent case has involved highly disruptive passengers who were abusive to both other pax and the the cabin crew and IMO should be offloaded ASAP. I think a reasonable case could be made against these people, and I'm sure there would be other pax on those flights who would be willing to testify against the people causing the diversion.

This will continue until people are actually held accountable for their actions.

Unfortunately I think you're right that many passengers would not actually be able to pay for the cost if the airline (or more likely insurance company) so actual recovery is highly unlikely.

 

[JohnK]

If you're not reclining then, of course, you're not using all the features that you paid for.

The same can be said for not being able to use meal tray. Or IFE.

And telling me to lose weight is such a lame put down it is beyong comprehension.

 

[BadgerBoi]

The same can be said for not being able to use meal tray. Or IFE.

Of course you can use your tray. And the IFE. Nobody is preventing you from doing that unless you decide to become a contortionist and twist yourself into some weird sort of shape that means you can't.

And telling me to lose weight is such a lame put down it is beyong comprehension.

who told you you had to lose weight? I don't think I did, but your post seems to be attributing that comment to me which is a bit disingenuous.

 

[Foreigner]

If airlines consider increasingly seat pitch and width ever so slightly passengers will travel in more comfort, even in Y.

 

[boomy]

If airlines consider increasingly seat pitch and width ever so slightly passengers will travel in more comfort, even in Y.

We can see the exact opposite trend happening in Y.
Also, the nasty incident with the knee defender happened in Y+ where pax do have some extra room but I guess it's never enough for some.

 

[JohnK]

Of course you can use your tray. And the IFE. Nobody is preventing you from doing that unless you decide to become a contortionist and twist yourself into some weird sort of shape that means you can't.

The tray is no longer level with the seat in front reclined. Things can slide off easily. But you know that already.

And you are assuming that everyone can recline or even wants to recline.

who told you you had to lose weight? I don't think I did, but your post seems to be attributing that comment to me which is a bit disingenuous.

I didn't say it was you. It was mentioned earlier in this thread. Lose weight if you want to eat your meal with the seat in front reclined. Nice smart @rse remark from the person that made the smart @rse remark.

P.S. You didn't make the smart @rse remark.

 

[SeatBackForward]

The tray is no longer level with the seat in front reclined. Things can slide off easily. But you know that already.

Most trays are connected to the seat frame, not the seat back, so they remain independent of the recline of the seat in front.