Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Government Transportation United States

US Lawmakers Propose Minimum Seat Sizes For Airlines (consumerist.com) 266

Posted by EditorDavid from the measures-about-measurements dept.
The size of each passenger's seat on an airplane -- as well as the distance between rows of seats -- should be standardized, according to legislation proposed by two American lawmakers. Slashdot reader AmiMoJo quotes Consumerist: The text of the bill does not specify any dimensions for seat widths or legroom. Rather, if the legislation is passed, the particulars would be left up to the FAA to sort out... Though seat size may vary from airline to airline, Cohen notes that the average distance between rows of seats has dropped from 35 inches before airline deregulation in the 1970s, to around 31 inches today. Your backside is getting the squeeze, as well, as the average width of an airline seat has also shrunk from 18 inches to about 16.5 inches.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Lawmakers Propose Minimum Seat Sizes For Airlines More

US Lawmakers Propose Minimum Seat Sizes For Airlines

Comments Filter:

  • About time! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18, 2017 @08:43AM (#54064939)

    It's about time! I don't fit in a standard airline seat, so currently have 3 options - Pay for business class, have an uncomfortable flight for me and seat neighbours, or don't fly. In recent years I've been taking option 3 more and more often.

    I'm not particularly fat, I'm just 6'6 and broad shouldered. With each generation getting bigger than their parents it doesn't make sense to be reducing seat sizes year on year.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by rfengr ( 910026 )
      I'm 6'5" and used to pre-board on SW. The gate attendant suggested that, and said they will let those 6'3" and over preboard. Worked great until the policy changed that does not allow pre boards to sit in exit rows. It's still useful for getting the 1st row bulkhead seat.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by WarJolt ( 990309 )

        I'm not 6'5", but I will never get on a plane again without knowing the model and seat configuration. I've been on a trip where the way there I had plenty of room. On the way back I felt like I was molesting this poor woman next me because my shoulders were wider than the seats.

        Lawmakers are useless. Vote with your ass.

        • Lawmakers can do what the market cannot - force the larger seats to happen.

    • Re:About time! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Saturday March 18, 2017 @09:56AM (#54065261)

      So why should short people subsidize you? If you need extra room, then pay for it yourself. Many airlines already offer "economy plus", so you already have that option. Why should that option be forced on everyone?

      Making every seat fit someone that is 6'6" will mean fewer people will fit on the plane, wasting fuel, and jacking up the ticket prices for everyone.

      • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

        by rfengr ( 910026 )
        It'd be nice if the airlines banned short people from sitting in the exit rows.

        • Why?

          *Never seen a booked out exit row.

          • Why?

            *Never seen a booked out exit row.

            Do you fly much? I used to travel a little and used to pay for the upgrade whenever possible. At least half the time it was booked out.

      • Re: About time! (Score:2, Troll)

        by DaHat ( 247651 )

        So why should short people subsidize you?

        Starting a statement/question with 'so' is a tell for cognitive dissonance.

        Funny you should ask, the folks up in business and first class are asking the same thing about you back in cattle class and your rather cheap seat.

      • If the airlines have their way, you'll be crammed into suitcases and loaded like luggage while having to pay extra for oxygen and not being thrown by the handlers.

      • So why should short people subsidize you? If you need extra room, then pay for it yourself. Many airlines already offer "economy plus", so you already have that option. Why should that option be forced on everyone?

        Making every seat fit someone that is 6'6" will mean fewer people will fit on the plane, wasting fuel, and jacking up the ticket prices for everyone.

        Well you can't discriminate on height
        I submitted an idea years ago for a seating plan that had staggered rows. So Row A would have the same sized space. Row B would have slightly different pitch per seat (say ranging from 31 to 38inches) and Row C would be fixed again, but because Row B was staggered, Row C would also have different seat pitch per seat.
        You only have to do this with one section of the plane and it will allow the few taller people the space they need, and short people and kids can fill the

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dywolf ( 2673597 )

        oh fuck off.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mallyn ( 136041 )
      Thank you. I have chosen option 3. The last time I flew anywhere was April, 2015. Almost two years ago.

      • My last flight was in 2010. I replaced air travel by overnight train travel. It's awesome! Benefits all around.

        - I have to sleep anyway.
        - I have to get up at 7, not at 4.
        - No ass groping and penis pic perverts
        - A fucking HUGE room compared to the cramped ... well, let's be generous and call it seat, next stage would probably be more aptly called a perch. With my own toilet and washing place to use for as long or short as I please without some asshat knocking at the door.
        - Better food

        And it's not even more e

        • - No ass groping and penis pic perverts

          You're a killjoy.

        • And it's not even more expensive.

          I doubt this. I'd gladly take the time for a train but they're so prohibatively expensive. That and oceans are the two reasons I choose airplanes.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by rtb61 ( 674572 )

          So I gather you would love high speed rail which the Republicans killed. Just curious are network connections available on the train, how much and what speed.

          • We over here in Europe don't give a fuck what your hicksville GOP politicians kill. Yes, I do enjoy high speed rail.

            And yes, internet is available. At reasonable speed, never bothered to make a speed test, it's fast enough for pretty much anything I wanted to do.

        • I did consider traveling by train from Melbourne to New York, but I wasn't able to get SCUBA certification in time.

    • Re:About time! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Saturday March 18, 2017 @11:05AM (#54065627)
      The problem isn't space. The problem is people unwilling to pay extra for extra space. The small percentage of the population which falls outside size norms want to pass laws requiring that they be given enough space at the same price as everyone else. As a result, just like the ADA individuals who got UC Berkeley's online course videos pulled off the web, larger people are going to get lower priced seats for regular-sized and smaller people eliminated.

      Most airlines now have an economy+ section, with bigger seat pitch and sometimes wider seats. It only costs about 10%-20% more than a regular seat, so you're not stuck paying business class fares. I'm sorry you'll have to pay a bit more than me to fly, but what gives you the right to deny a smaller person lower prices for a smaller seat?

      Legislation requiring slightly larger seats and slightly higher prices (economy+) be available on all flights is fine. Legislation outlawing "smaller" seats which fit the vast majority of passengers is stupid.

      • The small percentage of the population which falls outside size norms want to pass laws requiring that they be given enough space at the same price as everyone else.

        I'm well within "normal" size - 5'10", 150-160 pounds depending on the season and what kind of exercise I've been doing. I wear a jacket with 36" shoulders, and my trousers have a 31" waist.

        Most of the major US airlines have seats that just barely fit me. I have flown on one (can't remember which offhand) where my hip bone was pressing into the

        • Sounds like something the market regulates. Kinda like how the seat pitch is huge on KLM flights because the population is tall.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by amiga3D ( 567632 )

        I'm a big guy and I agree with you. I think it's only fair to let the market decide. I don't fly unless I have to, if it's less than 2 days travel by car I go by car. The last flight I made was to Hawaii a 10 hour flight from Atlanta. I took some pills before the flight and slept in misery most of the flight. I spent 4 months in Hawaii, took my pills and endured the cattle car flight back. If I had to do it every day it would be a problem but I can endure a little misery occasionally. People need to

        • I'm a big guy and I agree with you. I think it's only fair to let the market decide. I don't fly unless I have to, if it's less than 2 days travel by car I go by car. The last flight I made was to Hawaii a 10 hour flight from Atlanta. I took some pills before the flight and slept in misery most of the flight. I spent 4 months in Hawaii, took my pills and endured the cattle car flight back. If I had to do it every day it would be a problem but I can endure a little misery occasionally. People need to toughen up a little.

          I think my last flight was back around 2008 or 2009. Can't recall exactly. However, it was also to Hawaii, on board a KC-135 out of what was once McChord AFB, WA. That was probably the least comfortable flight I was ever on, or perhaps the second least comfortable. Least would have been the C-130 flight from Bagram, Afghanistan to Al Udeid, Qatar. Not only are those "cargo strap" bench seats uncomfortable, but that was one freakin' long flight for a 130 (still one of my top favorite aircraft though).

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by amiga3D ( 567632 )

            I made a few hops in a C-130 back and forth from Menorca, Spain to Torrejon Air Base near Madrid back when I was stationed at a radio relay post on Menorca. That is one hot, noisy and bumpy ride. At least there was plenty of room though.

      • I'm not egregiously overweight. I'm just a large man. 6'5", 250 lbs.

        Coach class on some airlines (hello Delta) is like torture. My knees press against the back of the seat in front of me, god forbid they recline it. My shoulders are so wide (and I'm not giant that way) that if I sit besides another person who is not "challenged of stature", there is not room for my shoulders or arms. I will almost always pay for "premium economy" to get the leg room, but there is still the matter of fitting my shoulders

      • Actually the problem is that people aren't able to compare airlines based on space. You can sort by price, departure time, number of stops, airline, connection time, total time, arrival time, but I've not seen a flight booking site offer filters based on amenities or comfort metrics of any kind.

        In the absence of that information, people are going to be making decisions without consideration of those things and so the airlines will race to reduce their costs.

        This market failure is not caused by a lack of reg

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mysidia ( 191772 )

        The small percentage of the population which falls outside size norms want to pass laws requiring

        No..... Even for people within size norms, the amount of space is inadequate and uncomfortble.

        The regulation should benefit everyone, they should do two things at minimum:
        (1) Require enough space for comfortable seating for people within a standard deviation of the average
        height and size to not be squeezed, and have enough space to not contact or bump into their neighbors., AND

        (2) Ban reclining seats --- U

      • The problem isn't space. The problem is people unwilling to pay extra for extra space.

        10% yes, 50% no, which is how it works here.

        Legislation requiring slightly larger seats and slightly higher prices (economy+) be available on all flights is fine.

        No it isn't, it's discrimination. Fair enough if you're a fat bastard who created your own problems, but tall people have no control over their height.

        Legislation outlawing "smaller" seats which fit the vast majority of passengers is stupid.

        So why not just stagger some rows so that some seats have 3 inches less pitch and the seat in front gets 3 inches extra? Average pitch stays the same, number of seats stays the same, prices stays the same, but taller people now have options.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by GNious ( 953874 )

        The problem isn't space. The problem is people unwilling to pay extra for extra space.

        Most of my travels have been for work, where I had zero say in the booking, and no options for upgrading to a better seat.

        Now, that's anecdotal, but experiences from other people confirms this - it's not people being unwilling to pay extra, it's the companies they work for who don't care whether you end up 9 hours in a too-small seat, bent in ways that would make a chiropractor flinch.

    • So because you are a special snowflake air travel has to become more expensive for us normal folks?

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by epyT-R ( 613989 )

      Bigger? You mean fatter? Perhaps you're in shape and are just large, which is understandable, but we should not accommodate the grotesque obesity.

  • Alternative headline... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by c ( 8461 ) <beauregardcp@gmail.com> on Saturday March 18, 2017 @08:44AM (#54064941)

    "US Lawmakers Solicit Campaign Donations From Airlines"

    It's not going to pass. There'll be a storm of lobbying activity and the proposal will quietly die at the bottom of a drawer somewhere...

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      "US Lawmakers Solicit Campaign Donations From Airlines"

      It's not going to pass. There'll be a storm of lobbying activity and the proposal will quietly die at the bottom of a drawer somewhere...

      Yep.

      Probably better to just require full disclosure of seat size. That way smaller people could buy smaller seats, and larger people larger ones.

      Requiring a fixed size is just going to make things less efficient and fundamentally more expensive.

    • Eh, you might be surprised. There's a lot of people who feel VERY vocal about the discomforts of flying. After all, the Passenger's Bill of Rights that put a bunch of previous restrictions passed easily. I suspect that issues like this are one of the ones that's nonpartisan enough for it to get lots of support, because congresscritters like doing popular stuff such as this which they can point to at election time (especially when it distracts people from the less visible crap that gets them bigger donations

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by c ( 8461 )

        Eh, you might be surprised.

        I might be, yeah. Not too many people have fond feelings about airlines, and I'm sure even the most stay-at-home politician has had some poor experiences.

        But seeing what's happening right now, I'm inclined to treat any pro-consumer legislation actually passing in the USA as a complete fluke.

    • If the lobbyists dont make it, they can't affect the proposal.

  • Cost (Score:5, Insightful)

    by KermodeBear ( 738243 ) on Saturday March 18, 2017 @08:46AM (#54064953) Homepage

    These days I avoid flying if I can. I'd rather drive 10 hours then put up with lines in security, getting molested by the TSA, sitting in a tiny seat in a tin can with a dozen screaming babies and sneezing people...

    But, those small seats are why some people can afford to fly. I'd like larger seats, sure - but I'd rather see that solved by the airlines instead of the government sticking their nose into the market yet again.

    Imagine this:

    Enjoy our spacious, comfortable seats on your flight with a full two feet of leg room. With no children under thirteen, you can be assured that your flight will be completed in peace. We still serve complimentary drinks and snacks and offer free pillows, so you'll be refreshed when you land. Why suffer? Fly NottaCrap Airline for only $100 more. Enjoy the experience. (tm)

    They'd have people stampeding to get tickets.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sinij ( 911942 )
      "But, those small seats are why some people can afford to fly."

      Unfortunately, as a business traveler that has to fly no matter what they charge, I am suffering as a result.

      • What does having the option of cheaper seats than are comfortable hurt you?

        • Presumably because company policy (they, after all, are paying for the seat) requires him to take cheapest seat available, and doesn't give him the option to pay for his own upgrade. That's usually how it works.

          • Presumably because company policy (they, after all, are paying for the seat) requires him to take cheapest seat available

            Wouldn't it make more sense to change that internal policy rather than force a new regulation on an entire industry, and imposing additional costs on millions of people?

            • Good luck with that.

              Recently I had a lengthy international trip which I was dreading, so much so that I read our travel policy word for word to see what options there might be for me, a man of 6'5". The policy allows purchasing only the cheapest coach/cattle seats... Even fot executives.

              In the end, it was easier for me to spend $2000 of my own money for a second seat so I would have sufficient leg room (economy plus doesnt do it, and still less than a business class ticket).

              Usually I drive, everywhere becau

    • What a lovely ideal you have - unfortunately, $100 over a typical ticket today isnt going to fund the reduction in seat rows needed to create 2 foot of leg room per passenger...

    • theaters. Minus the age restriction and free snacks this is exactly what some of the big theater chains are doing to try to get people to come back to the movies.

      The AMC near me just ripped out all of their seats and put in leather recliners with enough leg room that people can walk by without you having to stand up (or so says the wife, I haven't been yet). Unfortunately they can't control the kids on their fucking phones and rude dumb fucks talking.

      I remember what it was like to go to the theater and actu

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gfxguy ( 98788 )

      But, those small seats are why some people can afford to fly.

      Yes, and now it's a race to the bottom, as more and more people will continue to sacrifice comfort for lower ticket prices. It's like all the retail stores competing with WalMart, and the resulting drop in quality all the way around. Also, businesses generate the most revenue for airlines (from what I understand). That might include business class seats for some, but when my crew goes to a remote, nobody gets anything but coach, and I suspect most businesses are flying their non-executive employees that

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Fringe ( 6096 )
        Just because you are racing to the bottom, doesn't mean everyone is. Delta dedicates quite a few seats to Comfort+, and just brought back in-flight meals for cross-country flights for all seats.

    • You just (mostly) described first class.

      Actually, what you really described is a private jet.

      TANSTAAFL.

    • Re:Cost (Score:5, Insightful)

      by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Saturday March 18, 2017 @10:34AM (#54065451)

      These days I avoid flying if I can. I'd rather drive 10 hours then put up with lines in security, getting molested by the TSA, sitting in a tiny seat in a tin can with a dozen screaming babies and sneezing people...

      But, those small seats are why some people can afford to fly. I'd like larger seats, sure - but I'd rather see that solved by the airlines instead of the government sticking their nose into the market yet again.

      Imagine this:

      Enjoy our spacious, comfortable seats on your flight with a full two feet of leg room. With no children under thirteen, you can be assured that your flight will be completed in peace. We still serve complimentary drinks and snacks and offer free pillows, so you'll be refreshed when you land. Why suffer? Fly NottaCrap Airline for only $100 more. Enjoy the experience. (tm)

      They'd have people stampeding to get tickets.

      If you're presented with two options for a flight, and one ticket costs $20 less, then you're probably going to buy that ticket.

      However, if you got to actually sit in both seats first, and realized that one seat was a little bigger and more comfortable, you might be willing to spend the extra $20.

      The problem is that even if you really care about the size and comfort of your airplane seat it's really tough to judge it when you buy the ticket, so the airline has a strong incentive to reduce the price of the ticket by shrinking the seat and using cheaper materials.

      I think it's quite possible that consumers never wanted the trade-off of smaller seats for cheaper prices, and if we could have properly evaluated seats at the time of purchase they would have gotten bigger instead.

      If the market forces governing airplane seats are broken then it's exactly the kind of scenario where government should step in and regulate.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        JAL and ANA advertise more leg room and charge a little more. I always pay more to fly with them. I would guess that people's willingness to put up with small seats is inversely proportional to the length of the flight.

        • JAL and ANA advertise more leg room and charge a little more. I always pay more to fly with them. I would guess that people's willingness to put up with small seats is inversely proportional to the length of the flight.

          But how much more? I travel to Asia quite regularly and have found a couple of the budget airlines will do a premium economy seat for about $50 extra (on a 9 hour flight). This is a no brainer, but last time I checked, the branded airlines were charging about $1000 more for the same thing.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            It depends when you book etc, but basically the standard economy seats are larger and generally about â50-100 more than other airlines, and they often fly at better times too. Upgrading to premium economy is usually around â150-300.

    • They'd have people stampeding to get tickets.

      Actually, they would not. When people fly their top three concerns are:
      1. The cost
      2. The airfare
      3. The ticket price
      The reason seats have shrunk is because it allows the airlines to cut costs and reduce prices. That is what most passengers care about. Current seat sizes are fine for most people. For those that want more room, and are willing to pay for it, there is already "economy plus".

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Cederic ( 9623 )

        Hmm, no.

        I don't give a shit how cheap you make it, I'm not doing a 12 hour flight with my knees crushed by the seat in front.

        No point getting somewhere and having to hire a wheelchair. I'll stay at home and walk.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Greyfox ( 87712 )
      I say that too, but recently flew from Denver to Phoenix and back for less than it cost to park my car at the airport for the three days I was gone. The round trip ticket was neighborhood of $70. I was quite surprised at how comfortable the flight was, there was ample room for the couple of items I'd carried on and I cleared the TSA checkpoints with a minimum of fondling. I enjoy that drive, too, and have done it a couple of times, but I can't drive it for anywhere close to the cost of an airline ticket alo

  • Is there a problem having the "market" sort this out? Why [the attempt to] legislate it?

    If this were some regimes in the east, we'd be trumpeting our "luck" for living in the west, where we have "all the freedom"' and minimal government involvement in our lives.

    • Stop talking about the market. If the market was a real thing then different airlines would be shrinking seats to a different degree. Some airlines would be advertising 'our seats are bigger'. But as usual, every company moves in lock step with one another. There is no such thing as having the market sort it out, as is the case for most products and services.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gfxguy ( 98788 )
        No, the market is fully functional - unfortunately, though, it goes where the money is - and most people will allow themselves to be treated worse by the airlines if it means saving a few bucks, so they are in a race to the bottom. The only ones competing at the high end are for the longest flights, where people start to pay attention to comfort.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by moeinvt ( 851793 )

        The market is absolutely a real thing. Government is artificial. People would be engaging in commerce with or without government and often do so despite government. Notice that every single time a government tries to ban commerce, the market simply moves underground? Supply finds a way to meet demand regardless of what government tries to do.

        If you think it's bad that companies sometimes move in lock step with one another, how is it any better for a government bureaucrat to impose a "one size fits all" p

        • Because when the government does it, they are imposing a limit on what they deem to be workable for people, which is exactly what the government should be doing. If companies didn't get locked in a race to the bottom then we wouldn't need the government but sadly we do in many cases because commercial ventures lose all common sense pursuing profits.

      • Stop talking about the market. If the market was a real thing then different airlines would be shrinking seats to a different degree.

        Err they are. You can google the seat pitch per airline per aircraft. There are some flights I upgrade to premium, and others where I don't have to.

        • But the point is you only get what you pay for.

          • I'm not sure how that point came out of your earlier post, especially given every point you made was wrong.

            Airlines do have different pitches.
            Some airlines to advertise comfort.
            Airlines advertise different pitches for different prices on the same aircraft.
            Airlines have a different limit where customers no longer fly the carrier and stop reducing seat spacing (which is why I try and fly dutch airlines whenever I'm in Europe)

            This is a perfect example of market forces at work, which you claimed wasn't happenin

            • It's called advertising! They will promise anything as long as they can do it without it costing them much money. But yet then where is the airline with the biggest seats? I just tried it on two search engines. I expected st least one airline boasting larger seats all around but there are none. Where is the corporate investment in earning customers?

    • the problem is that seat sizes are only a major issue for about 10-20% of the population. It is more profitable to ignore the comfort and well being of those people, but they still need to fly. I see no need to regulate seat size, but rather to require that all passengers be acommodated with at least 2" of spare knee space if they choose not to follow a minimum size. Leave it to airlines to have to provide first class upgrades or whatever if they choose to cattle car everyone.

      In general flying has become

      • Everyone benefits from having more room. It's not just about fitting into the seat, it's about being comfortable. A small seat is more uncomfortable for people than a bigger seat.
    • I think the problems with airlines is the result of a lack of government intervention when the previous administration allowed a dozen or so airlines to merge into 4 huge monolithic airlines (American, Delta, United and Southwest) three of which all seem to have the same policies, prices, fees and outright contempt for the consumer. The ideal of the free market only works when the consumer has choices available to them and but under these circumstances I honestly feel the airlines have formed into a cartel,

    • The market has failed, thus legislation was proposed.

  • On my last flight from CPH to LAS and back again(about 10 hours each way). I booked a 1000$ seat instead of a 500$ seat to get a "premium" seat, and it was worth it. I could open my laptop and play games, I there was room for my legs and even to each side in the seat, I could even recline my seat enough to get a decent nap.
    But often you don't have the option of a seat double the price, you have to pay three or four times as much as the next step up.
    I have been traveling with other people that are below the

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dknj ( 441802 )

      sounds like you had a bulkhead seat. a > 14" laptop does not bode well on airplanes at all, even economy plus or whatever they call a 2" increase of space while you're still in economy. i downsized to a 14" laptop and i have zero issue with using it on any flight. my last flight i was sitting in the middle seat back in row 34 or something near the back of the plane and i was able to code without issue.

      if you fly, stay away from 15" or larger laptops, they are incompatible with planes

      -dk

  • ... if the legislation is passed, the particulars would be left up to the FAA to sort out...

    The FAA reauthorization expires in 198 days.

  • Yes. It's the smallest seat and the longest trip I made on that seat was 350 miles.

    It's the seat on my bicycle.

    And I enjoyed every bit of it! I call it Bicycle Class!

  • Purely autonomous personal vehicles will solve this.

    Recline your car seat back all the way and get in at 9 PM and have the car drive you all night long.

    No TSA hassles. No rumblings about paying extra for a carry on bag, a snack that should cost $1 instead costing $5, or being kicked by the guy behind you getting out of his seat because he has a small bladder.

    Driverless cars won't be the end of domestic airlines, but they will have to adapt to keep customers.

  • This "more regulation" will not going to fly with the current administration. They will either need to "remove two regulations" to make face, or not do it at all.

    That being said, we were able to vote with our dollars until very recently when there was real competition in the airline industry. Now there are only a few major airlines, and everything seems to be going downwards, at the passengers' expense. Wouldn't it be better to break them up again for better competition? This way we don't need to wait for t

  • I refuse to fly (Score:3)

    by p51d007 ( 656414 ) on Saturday March 18, 2017 @12:25PM (#54066049)
    #1 reason is the (illegal) TSA treating everyone like a criminal...searching EVERYONE in the name of "safety" (giving up your rights as a citizen...in the name of security LMAO). #2, I remember when just 30+ years ago, it was still somewhat of a treat to get on an airliner. I even remember as a kid, anyone would walk right up to the gate of the airplane, to see someone depart or arrive. Heck, you even got REAL China, REAL stainless steel knives and forks. #3, flying today? Nothing more than cattle being transported from one location to the other. Rude people, rude staff at times, courtesty out the door. Wonder how long it will be, until public transit hand rails will come along, and everyone is made to stand during the flight. Gotta maximize the passenger load. Sorry...I'll just drive to where I need to go. Screw the airlines, TSA and all that other crap!

  • information (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Lehk228 ( 705449 ) on Saturday March 18, 2017 @12:26PM (#54066053) Journal
    instead of interfering on behalf of the gluttons and the expense of everyone else, why not just mandate that the purchase page disclose the dimensions of the seat.

  • Just like cargo, you should pay per kilogram.

  • They're all about reducing regulations, deregulating airlines and letting the market sort issues out. They'll stick to their principles and never let additional regulation pass.
  • FAA has dual mandate. One to issue regulation and to enforce compliance. Second to promote air travel. It is high time we remove language regarding promotion of air travel. It does not make sense anymore. It should only be concerned with safety and compliance.

  • More Seats = More Time to Evacuate (Score:3, Informative)

    by SCUBA Instructor ( 667786 ) on Saturday March 18, 2017 @04:56PM (#54066983)
    Hi, Certification for emergency evacuation requires a test of real people evacuating in less than a specified amount of time. These tests are done with all airline employees as passengers, all physically fit, all alert, all expecting the drill to occur, and with no luggage. More seats means more less-physically fit passengers, clueless and sleepy passengers, kids, handicapped pax, and lots and lots of luggage and obstructions. Make safety the number 1 reason for seat minimums.

  • cattle class... (Score:3)

    by sxpert ( 139117 ) on Sunday March 19, 2017 @03:41AM (#54068331)
    is this law proposition coming from lawmakers that were recently forced to fly cattle class and didn't like it ?

Slashdot Top Deals

It's a naive, domestic operating system without any breeding, but I think you'll be amused by its presumption.

Close