The Dumb Way We Board Airplanes Remains Impervious to Good Data | Hacker News Reader

The Dumb Way We Board Airplanes Remains Impervious to Good Data

businessweek.com

16 pointsadventured10 comments

This is so significantly out of line with my perception of how planes are boarded that I must just have terrible perception.

Every plane that I have flown on recently seems to have boarded front to back with executive boarding first.

Agreed. I suspect the writer and editors are incompetent.

I think if you just consider Economy/Coach class, it is boarded back to front, after the 1st and business classes board first.

No matter what order I'm told to board, I usually wait until the last group, as I'd rather sit in the lounge and stretch my legs for 5 more minutes than in a cabin that feels all the more claustrophobic because of everyone standing in the aisles and reaching over me.

The problem I find, on crowded flights at least, is that if you don't have checked luggage and board late, you could find yourself without a place to put your carry-on, forcing you to check it.

I've had checked luggage lost temporarily as well as having to wait an additional 30 minutes to get it off the carousel so I try to carry-on when possible.

Have these models actually been verified experimentally? My perception is that people sitting in the back of the airplane often place their carry on in the first available overhead bin space. This creates a traffic jam as people sitting near the front walk past each other looking bin space and then back to their seat. It also presents a problem when exiting the plane as all the people in the front try to make their way back to collect their bags.

What I can't get my head around is the fact that we only use one of the plane doors to get in and get out. Internationally we see some airlines using two doors.

This is pretty easy to comprehend.

1. Some people are just ignorant and refuse to follow directions. Despite being in the final boarding group, they are the first to stand and attempt to board the plane, thinking they can somehow jump ahead. These same people would probably attempt to jump ahead of a long line at door 1 by boarding at door 2, causing delays and frustration.

2. I doubt jet bridges are cheap. Unless there is a simple way to retrofit them, all of them would need to be replaced to support dual door boarding. Sure, this might lead to slower boarding times; but, the airlines would pay for the jet bridges by increasing airfares. The airlines would also lose out on early boarding passes some customers purchase.

Overall, the benefit--let's be generous and say a 50% decrease in boarding time to 15 minutes--is simply not worth the costs to airports, airlines, and passengers. Compared to the 15-30 minutes of waiting for security, 1-2 hours of waiting at the gate to board, and 1-20+ hour flight, the 15-30 minute (1 hour for international?) boarding time is somewhat negligible.

I get it that there is an infrastructure cost but shorter turnarounds seem to have worked for Southwest: http://www.cnbc.com/id/43768488

A 15 minutes reduction each way on a busy route might allow the company to run an extra leg or two.

You don't need another jet bridge to board through two doors. At my local airport, the passengers seated at the back of the plane walk out of the jet bridge and across the tarmac to board through the back door.

Mythbusters did this, here are the results: http://mythbustersresults.com/airplane-boarding

Reply on news.ycombinator.com