[HN Gopher] Optimal boarding method for airline passengers (2008)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Optimal boarding method for airline passengers (2008)
        
       Author : tjalfi
       Score  : 27 points
       Date   : 2021-02-27 16:01 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arxiv.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arxiv.org)
        
       | coding123 wrote:
       | Just drive.
        
         | chrisseaton wrote:
         | Across an ocean?
        
       | throwawayboise wrote:
       | Best boarding strategy is probably for the average person to lose
       | 50 lbs. I've been on planes where some passengers could barely
       | squeeze down the aisle to their seats.
        
       | the__alchemist wrote:
       | Here's a derivative Youtube video (CGP grey). It visualizes how
       | different proposed methods work:
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAHbLRjF0vo
        
         | laurent92 wrote:
         | The CGP Grey video is particularly visual and well-designed;
         | and especially well described is everyone unboarding after each
         | experiment, using the slowest method of all.
        
         | scrooched_moose wrote:
         | Heck, I'm just impressed with it for acknowledging the family
         | issue. Not sure why this is such a popular internet topic, but
         | almost none of the treatments I've seen bother considering it.
         | 
         | Any method that starts separating a parent from their 7&9 year
         | olds is a non starter. Even telling a married couple they can't
         | stand in line together for 20 minutes is going to be unpopular
         | and lead to people breaking the system.
        
         | tjalfi wrote:
         | (submitter)
         | 
         | That video was where I learned about this paper and the impetus
         | for submitting this story.
        
       | davidrupp wrote:
       | I worked for several years in the 90's on United Airlines'
       | computer reservation system, on the team that managed seat
       | reservations. I proposed the window-middle-aisle scheme to a task
       | force that wanted to improve boarding times, and they ran a pilot
       | for a while, but never implemented it widely, probably because of
       | how disruptive it was to groups and families.
       | 
       | Separately, I have done a lot of flying for business, and I've
       | lost count of how many times I've seen people put their bags in
       | an overhead compartment several rows in front of their assigned
       | seat. The best way to speed up boarding would be to eliminate the
       | overhead compartment entirely. But I don't expect that ever to
       | happen.
        
         | bluejekyll wrote:
         | > would be to eliminate the overhead compartment entirely.
         | 
         | I feel like the incentives are backwards, or not aligned.
         | Airlines are starting to charge for checked baggage, when the
         | overhead compartment is the more valuable asset.
         | 
         | They should charge for the overhead space, you get a tag that
         | can be clearly seen from the aisle.
        
           | marcosdumay wrote:
           | Checked baggage has a real cost in terms of fuel and aircraft
           | performance. You carrying some means the company can not sell
           | that same amount as cargo.
           | 
           | Carry-on has costs that fall mostly on the passengers as a
           | collective. Even the stop time of the plane is shared with
           | other procedures, and more often than not boarding is not the
           | bottleneck.
        
           | SilasX wrote:
           | Yeah, I've long thought they should charge more for the
           | carryon (or at least for its overhead bin space) than for
           | checked luggage. The latter is more inconvenient for the
           | passenger and imposes fewer real costs on the trip (security
           | screening, boarding/deplaning time).
           | 
           | Edit: Earlier discussion:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12439465
        
           | xiphias2 wrote:
           | Why is the overhead component more valuable asset?
           | 
           | Every checked in baggage means less cargo on the plane, which
           | is lost money for the airline.
        
             | bluejekyll wrote:
             | This is a great point. From the airlines perspective this
             | is true. From passengers perspective I think it's generally
             | opposite?
        
               | xiphias2 wrote:
               | Yes
        
         | toast0 wrote:
         | > I proposed the window-middle-aisle scheme to a task force
         | that wanted to improve boarding times, and they ran a pilot for
         | a while, but never implemented it widely, probably because of
         | how disruptive it was to groups and families.
         | 
         | I haven't booked tickets in large groups, but usually when I
         | fly with family, we're all on the same record and in the same
         | row, so we could get lumped into the same group and optimize
         | our row individually.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | prepend wrote:
         | It seems to me that the main speed up is people not having to
         | get up to let people in. So they could let any group flying
         | together with a window go at the same time.
        
       | Steko wrote:
       | Optimal boarding in 2020's seems like you use an app and based on
       | a party's seating location, need for overhead bin, presence at
       | the gate/readiness to board the AI buzzes certain groups into a
       | higher priority lane.
        
       | ipnon wrote:
       | High speed trains in Taiwan have rotating seats, so if your loved
       | one sits in front of you they can rotate their row to face you. A
       | similar setup in airplanes would solve the biggest impediment to
       | implementing the optimal method, that "I'm not leaving my child!"
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | There is no way an aircraft seat that can rotate would get
         | airline approval for economy class, and then you'd still have
         | the problem of getting a seat not facing forward certified.
         | Usually the only people in rearward facing seats are airline
         | personnel so they can see the cabin and spot issues with the
         | passengers.
        
           | MaxBarraclough wrote:
           | > There is no way an aircraft seat that can rotate would get
           | airline approval for economy class
           | 
           | Why's that?
        
             | jacquesm wrote:
             | Because it would mess up in flight service, would be a mess
             | when it comes to having people get up and go to the loo,
             | would be hard to keep an eye on during ascent/descent and
             | so on, and besides it would only work for the outer seats
             | of a row, and somehow the geometry of the inner seats would
             | have to remain undisturbed (shared arm rests), and that's
             | before we get to talk about the weight. It's a funny idea
             | which works on trains because the rows are much narrower
             | and the weight isn't a consideration, nor do trains
             | typically have in transit meal service tray tables mounted
             | in the backs of the seats before them.
        
           | rjsw wrote:
           | Some military transport aircraft [1] have had all passenger
           | seats facing to the rear.
           | 
           | [1]
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickers_VC10#Military_service
        
             | MaxBarraclough wrote:
             | As I understand it, rear-facing feats are generally
             | accepted to be safer, but are far worse for airsickness.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | Same in vehicles. Another factor: lots of people simply
               | prefer to face forward.
        
         | sokoloff wrote:
         | I can't imagine the seat pitch in economy on any airliner is
         | nearly large enough to permit rotation.
         | 
         | Removing even a single row of seats is probably worse for
         | airline economics than the amount by which it would speed
         | boarding or add flexibility. (US law also prohibits car seats
         | from being installed in rear-facing seats in aircraft; that law
         | I think is a slight detriment to safety, but it is the law.)
        
           | tyingq wrote:
           | Yeah, it's pretty cool, but wouldn't work with airline seat
           | pitch: https://youtu.be/6-ee-eZtUKc
           | 
           | There is a design where the middle seat is further back than
           | the aisle and window seats. It would help in a different
           | way...it's easier to get in and out of the seats. There's
           | even an option to slide the aisle seat in during boarding,
           | though I'm somewhat skeptical about that.
           | 
           | It does make the middle seat more desirable than it currently
           | is, by making it wider and solving the armrest problem.
           | https://www.fastcompany.com/3067612/this-redesigned-
           | airplane...
        
             | nsxwolf wrote:
             | I am picturing a seat where the seat itself is stationary
             | but the back slides forward or back on a track. Tray tables
             | could be the style that stow in the seat and flip up and
             | over.
        
               | sokoloff wrote:
               | If you look at the side view of seated people, the
               | incline of the upper body and the nesting of feet under
               | legs of next row pax works against you for club seating
               | (seating which faces each other) and works for you for
               | all forward seating.
               | 
               | If you look at the sibling comment's video, you can see
               | that the pelvis of humans seated back-to-back is farther
               | apart than what you can achieve in today's all forward-
               | facing seating.
               | 
               | People are willing to some extent to nest feet with
               | people they know but probably don't want to sit 90deg
               | upright for over an hour.
        
               | Izkata wrote:
               | Like these (except for the tray):
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxDrPeb2mxs
        
       | dfilppi wrote:
       | It would be more efficient to slide out the passenger compartment
       | into the terminal for loading and unloading.
        
       | IgorPartola wrote:
       | Myth Busters did an episode about this. Basically they found that
       | the optimal method mathematically did not get high satisfaction
       | marks and the most satisfying method was definitely not the
       | fastest. I guess we value fairness more than we value overall
       | efficiency.
       | 
       | https://mythresults.com/airplane-boarding
        
         | sneak wrote:
         | This is something I find to be true a lot in many different
         | places. Humans place outsized (IMO incorrect) value on things
         | like fairness, perceived fairness, and sometimes even
         | retribution/punishment, in cases where they really do no good
         | at all.
         | 
         | Something we failed to shuck when we came down from the trees,
         | I guess, to paraphrase Heinlein.
         | 
         | It's sort of crazy how often this comes back up again and again
         | once you notice this. Behaviors while driving are another big
         | one.
        
         | harha wrote:
         | On the fairness aspect: one issue is checking in hand luggage
         | and the perception that boarding first will increase the
         | chances of avoiding that and the wait at the luggage belt after
         | the flight.
         | 
         | There are several things to improve: 1. it would be good to
         | inform about the need to check luggage before walking through
         | the whole airport or at least giving that option, it's very
         | annoying to carry luggage around only for it to be checked in
         | at the last moment. 2. incentives would be nice, eg if a flight
         | is fully booked, why not add a small amount of extra weight if
         | you volunteer to check in the hand luggage. 3. primarily check
         | in those who also have checked in luggage. I've often been on
         | flights where they check in the hand luggage of some people,
         | then you end up waiting with many others who took the hand
         | luggage on board and are waiting for checked luggage. 4. Let
         | people upgrade for a small fee last minute, say 5-10$ to avoid
         | checking in, but only as a last measure.
         | 
         | Once the luggage is dealt with I don't see why anyone would
         | care - I'd prefer boarding last in that case.
        
           | easton wrote:
           | If you knew you'd be able to check your too big to carryon
           | bag at the gate for free you would never pay the cost of
           | checking it before security (unless it is too large to fit
           | through the X-ray scanner at TSA).
        
             | xboxnolifes wrote:
             | Or if you're packing things that can't go in carry-ons.
        
         | burlesona wrote:
         | Note that the Southwest Airlines method (no assigned seats) was
         | fastest in the Mythbusters test. I'm surprised that it got such
         | a low "satisfaction" rating, as it's one of the main appealing
         | factors for me to fly Southwest.
         | 
         | Maybe it's just very polarizing, and SWA "gets away with it"
         | because their market share roughly represents the percentage of
         | travelers who like that method?
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | vmception wrote:
       | Tangental note:
       | 
       | I recently had a flight that had some backwards seats. My seat
       | was one. First class.
       | 
       | I had read for many years that this was the best for passengers
       | but consumers wouldn't accept it. I had always thought that was a
       | bad assumption probably based on some tiny focus group that
       | nobody ever questioned, and look at that, I didn't have a problem
       | with it.
        
         | chrisseaton wrote:
         | > this was the best for passengers
         | 
         | It's only best for when you crash.
         | 
         | When you're not crashing (most of the time) most people find it
         | quite a bit less pleasant as it means you're facing down when
         | the aircraft climbs and descends. I'd avoid it pretty strongly
         | when booking seats.
        
           | vmception wrote:
           | I didn't find it less pleasant, I was glad they ignored the
           | focus groups. I don't get the impression anyone knows how
           | they'd actually feel, given how less common that seating
           | arrangement is. I really enjoyed the angle out of the window.
        
             | chrisseaton wrote:
             | > given how less common that seating arrangement is
             | 
             | It used to be much more common. They seem to have done away
             | with it - I guess based on customer response not just
             | randomly.
             | 
             | You can't now because it's mostly gone, but you used to be
             | able to see when booking a seat that all the forward-facing
             | ones were booked before anyone booked a single rearward-
             | facing one.
             | 
             | For example - united Polaris. Replaced a 50/50 forwards-
             | backwards configuration they'd had standard for decades
             | with the overlapping style almost everyone seems to use
             | now.
             | 
             | I associate forward-backward with crusty old 747s and
             | military transport and I think that's how much consumers
             | see it as well.
        
       | permo-w wrote:
       | It absolutely bewilders me that people will queue for half an
       | hour for no other reason than getting into their cramped,
       | uncomfortable seat as quickly as possible
       | 
       | People will queue just because other people are queuing, to no
       | concrete end, and we wonder why democracy keeps throwing up such
       | bad eggs
        
         | Steko wrote:
         | Standing up for a bit before an hour or 10 in a cramped airline
         | seat isn't so bad imho.
        
         | EvanAnderson wrote:
         | Prior to COVID, at least, earlier boarding makes getting space
         | in overhead bins more likely.
        
           | jghn wrote:
           | This is the reason. I go back and forth on if I prefer
           | checking luggage or carry on. Which ever is my preference at
           | the time has a huge impact on my boarding strategy.
        
         | drewg123 wrote:
         | If you board first, you're guaranteed overhead bin space, and
         | you have 20-30 minutes to work before you have to put away your
         | laptop for takeoff. If you're in first or business class,
         | you're often offered a ground service (a complimentary drink),
         | though I haven't seen this since COVID started a year ago.
        
         | Mediterraneo10 wrote:
         | Being at the front of the queue means you don't have to make
         | your way through a long series of other passengers who are busy
         | putting their luggage into the overhead compartment and not
         | able to get out of your way. Having to squeeze through that can
         | feel more cramped and claustrophobic than the seat you finally
         | arrive at.
         | 
         | Also, if you are at the back of the queue, there is
         | occasionally a risk of there no longer being space in the
         | overhead compartment for your stuff.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | lumost wrote:
         | I've always wondered why airlines charge for the privilege of
         | being first on the plane rather than the last...
        
           | icegreentea2 wrote:
           | I always feel like you're actually paying for first dibs on
           | carry-on / overhead baggage positioning. Well, unless you're
           | actually in business/first class.
        
             | ModernMech wrote:
             | My strategy is to always be last on the plane. More often
             | than not they will run out of overhead space and gate check
             | my bag for free. Then I don't have to worry about hauling
             | my luggage through the plane. I agree most people want
             | first dibs on overhead baggage bins, but what's the big
             | deal? I never understood this.
        
               | RobertoG wrote:
               | The deal is that when you arrive you have to wait for
               | your bag and sometimes that's a lot of time.
        
               | im3w1l wrote:
               | Makes a lot of sense if you already checked bags anyway.
        
               | potta_coffee wrote:
               | I pack very light and I hate checking luggage. To me,
               | it's nice to grab my little bag and immediately exit the
               | airport rather than wait for my luggage. Spaces like
               | airports with tons of people make me anxious and I
               | optimize for getting out as quickly as possible. It's
               | just nice not having a lot of possessions to worry about
               | as well when traveling. Of course, this strategy doesn't
               | work for every kind of trip.
        
               | sneak wrote:
               | Less time at the destination airport: you get to skip
               | baggage claim, and the time at baggage claim waiting for
               | the throwers to unload your luggage, drive it to baggage
               | claim, and throw it on to the belt.
               | 
               | Additionally, less risk of loss, too: obviously not all
               | bags make it.
        
               | jghn wrote:
               | The thing I like the most about checking my bag is not
               | having to lug my stuff through the airport while waiting.
               | The primary downside for me is having to wait at the
               | baggage claim on the other side. Gate checking can be the
               | worst of both worlds if it's the sort where I still have
               | to go through baggage claim.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-02-27 23:01 UTC)