Airbus promises Wi-Fi – yay – and 3D movies (meh) in new A330 Airbus has promised that its next plane, the A330 Neo, will bring 3D movies into the sky. Announced today, the A330 Neo is an upgrade for the twin-aisle, 250-300 seat A330. Airbus says the new model will come in two sizes and add about ten seats to current configurations, while reducing fuel consumption by 14 per cent per seat …
But did a flying customer *ever* get the chance to select an aircraft to fly in based on anything other than 'that's the one that's flying today'?
This sells it to the airlines, who use it in their publicity about how wonderful their aircraft are, and then squeeze in the seats on a 29" pitch fit for neither man nor beast.
Time was, air travel was a luxury. These days, if you're not sat at the front, it's a pain.
I don't buy the painful aspect of air travel. We cross oceans or continents in days. Sure, we get a bit squeezed and the food is dodgy. But people have never been able to travel so far, so fast, for so little. A little discomfort is worth it. And I'm a hefty 6'3" with shoulders wider than an economy seat, aka the bloke you don't want to sit next to.
The ferry to Spain is all well and good (I can remember the old service from southampton to bilbao) but can I take a ferry to say, Denver?
Well, I could go by boat over the pond, round Florida and up the Mississippi a very long way eventually ending up on the South Platte which is not that far from Denver but how long would it take? 3 weeks?
I'm like a previous poster in that I'm larger than the average person (ex Rugby No 8 forward). I've given up flying more than 5 hours at the back of the plane when it is for personal reasons eg Holiday and pay the extra to travel Business Class. I have to spend enough time at the back of the plane when on Company business to not want to do it when the flight is for me. I did 20+ long haul flights last year on business. The Frequent flyer miles I get for that allow me to get cheap Business Class flights.
Flying was once a pleasure but now, and especially with the US Paranoia and fear that everyone of going to destroy their ****** country it is no fun anymore.
"Flying was once a pleasure but now, and especially with the US Paranoia and fear that everyone of going to destroy their ****** country it is no fun anymore."
Did someone force you to take a job that requires you to make 20+ flights a year? I sure as hell wouldn't take it. As far as I'm concerned my job is simply a necessary evil to earn money to live my life and any job that eats into my own time on a regular basis isn't worth having. If you did 20 long hauls that a minimum of 40 days a year on business trips, probably closer to 60. Fsck that. You must be mad.
I can't sit still for more than 90', so without the option of lying down, I don't get any sleep, so I get very grumpy indeed, and am in massive physical pain. But I could choose to pay 5x as much and get more space, so it's down to me - and if I could afford it, I certainly would.
I don't buy the painful aspect of air travel. We cross oceans or continents in days. Sure, we get a bit squeezed and the food is dodgy. But people have never been able to travel so far, so fast, for so little. A little discomfort is worth it. And I'm a hefty 6'3" with shoulders wider than an economy seat, aka the bloke you don't want to sit next to.
You don't. But many do. I absolutely refuse to entertain thought of long haul flight in cattle. Been there done it (enough times). No more.
As you say, for you the little discomfort it worth it. Fair enough. For me it is not.
If it wasn't so easy to travel so far, so fast, for so little would be travel as much as we do. Do we really need to travel quite as much as we do. I would argue that lot of business travel (execs of a multinational company for example want to jet around the offices around the world to spout some crap that nobody believes nor wants to hear) especially when plenty of money has been sent on VC equipment.
Well if you can't fit into your seat, I'm sorry but then you should be required to buy two. Or airlines need to revisit their seat designs to ensure people fit them.
What always gets me is the safety briefing with the directions to kiss your ass goodbye...with the seat pitch that is impossible for most people.
>Well if you can't fit into your seat, I'm sorry but then you should be required to buy two.
Big people who can't fit into one seat can't fit comfortably into two either.
Seats are designed for smaller than average people. I can fit into a cattle class seat. I'm hardly huge, but it's not what you'd call comfortable.
>Or airlines need to revisit their seat designs to ensure people fit them.
Less money that way.
Although I suspect long-haul is only fully packed a few times a year, and they could easily lose a few rows of seats to give everyone more legroom on most flights without losing much income.
I'm waiting for the first carrier to put a capsule hotel in the sky. If more people could sleep on long-haul it would be much more comfortable. (Although you'd have to give everyone their own crying baby on check-in to keep that old-fashioned long-haul feeling.)
"What always gets me is the safety briefing with the directions to kiss your ass goodbye...with the seat pitch that is impossible for most people."
I physically can't reach around to kiss my own arse, so, in case of emergency, am I obliged to kiss the arse of the passenger in front of me? Does it cost extra to choose who?
@Simon,
Can't argue about the wonder of the ability to travel... but as another poster has said, any flight longer than a few hours and if at all possible I'm sitting at the front. There are damn good reasons even to pick the seat you want - and pay extra - on the discount, and even the mainstream planes.
Got family in Rio - that flight is so much more sensible with BA's flat business class (and occasionally cheaper than peasant plus, oddly enough). Though even the flat beds aren't long enough for me; I stick out the end... even in business class there's a knack to picking the best seats and they're not always the obvious.
But then, transport is always designed to stuff people in like cattle; doesn't matter whether it's planes, buses, trains... the people that design them don't ride in them. Or they wouldn't design them like that.
Don't want toys. Want space.
It's impressive yes, but I do wonder about their priorities.
Does anyone really care these days about the entertainment systems on aircraft? Everyone has a phone or a tablet. A USB port for power would be far more useful and a lot cheaper to install and maintain - everyone wins.
I'd much rather they spent the money on making the leg room a little better. I am 6ft, but I frequently find my knees crammed up against the seat in front. Even half an inch would make a difference, and forget the fancy 3d movies.
"Sure, we get a bit squeezed and the food is dodgy. But people have never been able to travel so far, so fast, for so little."
Or to look at it another way - people have never been able to cause so much pollution just for a 1 way trip.
No doubt I'll be modded down for making that comment but just look up into the sky on a sunny day in most places in europe and look at all the shit from the aircraft turning the blue into a hazy white. And yes I know thats ice crystals but there's an equal amount of CO2 and other pollutants emitted along with the water vapour that you can't see.
I've flown from US to London and back maybe a dozen times and US to Australia a few times. All those trips were coach except for one, and flying long-distance in coach is definitely less pleasant than business or first. But, a while back I read a biography of John Adams which included detailed descriptions of _his_ trips between the colonies and England. He had better class accomodations than most, but compared to that even coach class on the cheapest airlines is a delight. Steerage class on the ocean liners of the 20th century wasn't exactly a picnic in the park either.
Flew Turkish Airlines from Edinburgh > Istanbul > Antalya. Had more leg space that I've ever had on a plane. Nice entertainment systems and very comfortable. However return flight a few weeks later, same airport, same route, same time, t'other direction. Cramped, no entertainment...
Some airlines have seems to have consistently better planes and if I do bother to check I can find out what sort of plane I'm *supposed* to be getting. Given there are quite often multiple carriers to a given destination, it does influence my choice a little bit (we've used KLM for part of this route in the past). But in the end, I get whatever turns up at the airport.
Re: "But did a flying customer *ever* get the chance to select an aircraft to fly in based on anything other than 'that's the one that's flying today'?"
Sometimes, you can! Many years ago I traveled frequently between FRA and BOS. The only direct flight with Lufthansa was usually to expensive. With US Airways I had the option to connect via PIT, PHL or CLT. FRA-PHL was serviced by old 767s with overhead screens, but they used brand new A330s with in-seat entertainment on the other two routes. All routes were usually the same price, so my choice was based on aircraft!
Never mind that connecting to PHL is a bad idea in wintertime anyway.
Yes
Well at least with Air NZ you can. The online booking system tells you the plane types.
For example, NZ0008 on 24 July is a 777.
Sure, there might be times when they have to make changes, but 90+% of the time you'll get what they say.
How well would this fair, in regards to motion sickness ?
3D can be disorientating in a stable environment, I wonder how well it will fair with all the little bumps.
Ladies and Gentlemen were approaching some turbulent weather please could you fasten your seatbelts and remove your glasses, it got so messy last time !!
I was under the impression that the AV stuff on planes was installed by a third party to the plane's manufacturer. Certainly the seats are.
To be honest, like Patrick Smith I think better seat design should be a higher priority for airlines.
"I was under the impression that the AV stuff on planes was installed by a third party to the plane's manufacturer. Certainly the seats are."
Nope, everything is installed by "the manufacturer" before delivery and you choose from a list of available configurations that are supported by the wiring installed by default. Each airline will buy a plane in a specific configuration (and cost) and the manufacturer (mainly Boeing or Airbus) will deliver a ready to fly plane to you. The components that go into making the plane are usually subbed out to other companies (there is a massive aircraft manufacturing industry in the UK) and main components are delivered to the aircraft as a ready made block that just gets bolted and welded in (if needed). So the seats and AV systems are usually made by a 3rd party (as are most components on a plane) but installed as if they are part of the production line.
Here you can find a comparison of economy seating of different airlines.
My personal feeling is, that the seat pitch is even more important than the seat width.
If I look at the new 787s, I don't see a lot of improvement in this regard, so I have little hope for what the airlines will use in the new Airbus models. Most likely they will cramp in whatever they can.
Btw. as far as I'm concerned with they can keep their 3D stuff. I would already be happy with a good OLED or IPS screen that is viewable, even after the guy in front inevitably reclines the seat as soon as the seatbelt light is off.
My main problem with flights is the recycled air that everyone has coughed and sneezed in; I have known colleagues who had to sit around a guy with the flu for 8hrs and then (guess what!) they all contracted it.
My wife occasionally blacks out on long haul flights with the low oxygen levels (or maybe it is aerotoxic syndrome).
Running the air conditioner properly costs money. Airlines hate spending money.
Anyone remember the days when the rear of the plane had smoking section? Remember what the air was like back then? Ice cold, and very fresh.
Banning smoking in flights saved airlines tons of money as they could dial the aircon right down.
The oxygen levels are not really that low; you are never above 8500 feet pressure altitude, which means about 75% c.f. Sea Level.
The air is partially recycled only; and that is passed through extremely-fine filters to remove bacteria/dust.
The big problem with cabin air is ozone. If you fly on aircraft with no ozone scrubbers, or even old ozone scrubbers, it reacts with organic compounds on your skin and clothes, creating all sorts of irritants. This is particularly noticeable in the eye and nose areas.
Finally, all Boeings prior to the 787 did not do what Airbus have always done, which is to spray what little water was removed by the air compressors back into the intakes. So most Boeings have extremely dry air (way worse than the Sahara) which can also affect the eyes and nose in particular. Using lip-salve in the nose will really help.
I'd like to have a view as out of cockpit, especially takeoff/landing (at 11km up not much to see). Nice to have some instruments overlaid and maybe some voice channel as well. That would be great fun and I can't see it costing to much but there is always the ones scared of flying who don't want to be reminded of their current position and I can bet some daft security reasons not to.
At one time a pilot left the door to the cabin open on a medium haul flight so those near the front on the aisle got a goodish view of part of the flight.
In my day, we made our own entertainment. Yon urchin looked out window, the missus complained t' steward, and I tried to get some kip.
When "voice activated" gizmos started pokin' their noses in, t' urchin would say loudly "DELETE FILE YES", and all the silly buggers would turn their stupid boxes off.
Now 'es got a twinkle in his eye when we talk about WiFi: I can't can't see it endin' well.
"Announced today, the A330 Neo is an upgrade for the twin-aisle, 250-300 seat A330. Airbus says the new model will come in two sizes and add about ten seats to current configurations, while reducing fuel consumption by 14 per cent per seat."
250 x 14% = 35
Use 1 Olympic swimming pool of fuel to get fron A to B and have, magically, 34 swimming pools of fuel.
Come on El Reg, you're supposed to be a science/technical publication. You may have to take what the Airbus PR feeds you but some comment should be made.
By all means let people have wi-fi and stuff, but let me go in a low-tech section where I don't have to listen to all the self important business twats with their regional sales figures, conference calls and PowerPoint wankery. I can see it now, spread all over the cabin like an extension of their office in a "look at me I'm so important and busy" kind of way.
Also, why can't a 20% larger-than-average person like myself pay 20% more for 20% more space and a 20% bigger seat? Why is the only option Business Class, which is 20% more of everything (and a curtain) for 250% more money?
well there's the rub. United and other US airlines will try and sell you a *bit* more leg space with their "not quite economy economy" seats. Basically, the exits row, and some other seats near 1st. Often 1st class upgrades are usually only 2-3x the economy upgrades, if the flight is not full. Very nice when going trans-usa...
Something I have learned from mucho flying, seat prices are not uniform. In fact, generally the very cheapest business class seat is usually slightly more than the most expensive coach class seat... When you factor in the cost of checking luggage (>3 bags), it actually makes business class a possible choice.
Beer, because they don't charge for it in first...
P.
3D, on a plane? Hmm, no thanks. Still not persuaded that it's worth any of my money on terra firma, never mind whilst defying gravity.
Airlines, if you want to add something that might actually enhance our entertainment experience, encode your movies for/with Dolby Headphone.
The movies will still have a stereo soundtrack, but even with the coke tins + string affairs that get handed out in cattle class it will give us some semblance of surround sound, assuming it can block out the sound of the onboard a/c. You won't have to upgrade your equipment (unless it's so bad that you have to reset it several times per flight (looking at you here BA) ) so you score on that front as well.
Living on the other side of the world from the rest of my family I have flown a fair bit in the last few years. Key points are:
1) bring noise cancelling headphones
2) minimise any connections, but make sure you have a couple of hours transit time (it's terrible to be 30 mins late and then wait 8 hours for the next connection).
3) avoid Heathrow and the US. Fly into CDG or Schipol then to UK regional airport. Or via Dubai and Glasgow/Newcastle/Manchester/wherever else they land. Friendly customs and immigration, no ridiculous queues; minimal security theatre just appropriate security.
For short haul, I can only suggest this is best doing aeromedical retrievals - get ambulance to airport, walk through building onto apron, climb steps, pilot asks if it's ok to go now, you say yes. Reverse on landing; ambulance to taxi you to the hospital. Stroll in wearing flight suit; get treated like a god; provide reassurance then reverse back to original hospital. (NB: there is a higher-than-usual chance of needing to provide in-flight medical assistance, and there's no booze.) Additional upsides are flying on non-standard routes at much lower levels (nice countryside), getting to sit in the cockpit when there's not a patient, and having a headset to chat to everyone else. Oh, and you get paid to do this. Awesome.
(the only thing better is going in the helicopter)
Go via CDG, really?
My own experience of CDG is that terminal changes are painful in the extreme (having to endure the extended bus ride/sight seeing tour that a change entails) to say nothing of having to go back through security again on reentry to the terminal (so not a proper airside transit).
Lets not forget the joys of dodging falling bits of roof either, I'm all for making travel more exciting but there are times when less is more.
Finally, some airlines (looking at you Air France) have scheduled flights with insane connection times (eg 1 hour between an inbound transatlantic flight and a departing hop to LHR) that require them to station somebody at the steps of the inbound aircraft with your name on a board. They will then whisk you away in their Citroen/Renault van to your departure gate in the other terminal.
Presumably, they do this due to experience telling them that pax are unlikely to make the outbound in time if they have to take the tour. I would hope that they no longer do this, but if you see a connection time of 1 hour or just over in your itinerary, be concerned.
I'm 6ft6 and I have size 14 feet and a crook knee. I can wedge myself into an economy seat without too much fuss or discomfort and without disturbing my seatmates.
Tall people are used to living in a world designed for gnomes, so aircraft are really no more uncomfortable than sitting in a BMW (where by shoulders touch the ceiling) or sleeping in army beds (where my feet + ankles stuck out the end).
It seems to be mid-sized people that whine the most.
So you are happy being uncomfortable on a flight because, for you, that is the status quo?
Personally I'm 6'5" and 221lb and dislike economy air travel due to the lack of leg room. I also dislike economy rail and bus travel for exactly the same reason. The difference is I am usually only on a bus for 30 mins or so, or a train for a couple of hours max. 10 hours on a long-haul in an economy bucket is detestable.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
