Page 1 of 1

PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 3:35 pm
by HamiltonWest

PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:02 pm
by Charl
Because you can book a flight on a specific plane these days, the market will tell us for the first time, what the comfort/cost trade-off actually is.

Personally, I won't set foot on a 10-abreast plane.
(I'm not that big, but it puts you 2 away from the aisle when in a favoured window seat. This is not insignificant on a 12-hour haul)
I see it as the most cynical of marketing ploys to show a seat-mile cost saving.
In theory you could pack the aircraft with coffin-shaped passenger holders and save a bundle.

Passenger air transport, and particularly long-haul flights, has steadily deteriorated in the Century of Flight as the bean-counters took command.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:45 am
by Ian Warren
Gawd , not sure were i have put it , a ARBUST brochure , yes the 380 - compared 1960s man and 2000 man and a seat spread to suit .. I have not flown on the type but talking to a chap out plane spotting last week said the 777 was roomier and he was a big 1960s man . ... don't figure either - how many people here have been on a flight and gone walkies only to find the aircraft near empty !

Charl wrote:
QUOTE (Charl @ Nov 4 2013,9:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Passenger air transport, and particularly long-haul flights, has steadily deteriorated in the Century of Flight as the bean-counters took command.

Biggest problem with the bean counter , ..... and their snotty move aside back to stearage boy attitude !