CNN: Legislating minimum seat width/pitch?
Feb 11, 2016, 8:00 am
#1
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Massachusetts, USA; AA Plat, DL GM and Flying Colonel; Bonvoy Platinum
Posts: 24,233
CNN: Legislating minimum seat width/pitch?
A U.S. Representative has proposed minimum standards for airline seats, basing his argument more on safety during an evacuation than comfort. Full article on cnn.com here.
(I urge posters not to digress into their opinions of the role of government in regulating private enterprise, lest this thread be shut down or moved to OMNI/PR.)
(I urge posters not to digress into their opinions of the role of government in regulating private enterprise, lest this thread be shut down or moved to OMNI/PR.)
Feb 11, 2016, 8:42 am
#2
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
It's not as though this requires legislation. If it's what consumers want, air carriers will provide it. But, they don't. They want cheap seats. That translates into more passengers crammed into the same number of cubic feet and thus less width/pitch.
Why do people purchase Y in cramped aircraft which they hate when F is available? Because it's cheaper?
Why do they purchase "basic" fares with no seat assignments when they could book aisle seats forward? Because it's cheaper?
Why aren't there two full meals served in Y on TCON flights when there are on TATL? Because consumers want cheaper fares.
Why do people purchase Y in cramped aircraft which they hate when F is available? Because it's cheaper?
Why do they purchase "basic" fares with no seat assignments when they could book aisle seats forward? Because it's cheaper?
Why aren't there two full meals served in Y on TCON flights when there are on TATL? Because consumers want cheaper fares.
Feb 11, 2016, 9:09 pm
#3
Join Date: May 2009
Location: South Park, CO
Programs: Tegridy Elite
Posts: 5,678
The proposed amendment didn't make it out of committee
http://pointmetotheplane.boardingare...577.1424656132
http://pointmetotheplane.boardingare...577.1424656132
Feb 12, 2016, 3:14 pm
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CHA, MAN;
Programs: Delta DM 1 MM; Hz PC
Posts: 11,169
It's not as though this requires legislation. If it's what consumers want, air carriers will provide it. But, they don't. They want cheap seats. That translates into more passengers crammed into the same number of cubic feet and thus less width/pitch.
Why do people purchase Y in cramped aircraft which they hate when F is available? Because it's cheaper?
Why do they purchase "basic" fares with no seat assignments when they could book aisle seats forward? Because it's cheaper?
Why aren't there two full meals served in Y on TCON flights when there are on TATL? Because consumers want cheaper fares.
Why do people purchase Y in cramped aircraft which they hate when F is available? Because it's cheaper?
Why do they purchase "basic" fares with no seat assignments when they could book aisle seats forward? Because it's cheaper?
Why aren't there two full meals served in Y on TCON flights when there are on TATL? Because consumers want cheaper fares.
Feb 14, 2016, 2:07 pm
#6
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,687
I can see the safety angle, and there are already regulations about seat pitch at exit rows.
Probably a faster way to get airlines to stop the squeeze would be to adjust the regulation on minimum number of FAs - perhaps 1:40 instead of 1:50.
Probably a faster way to get airlines to stop the squeeze would be to adjust the regulation on minimum number of FAs - perhaps 1:40 instead of 1:50.
Feb 15, 2016, 4:29 am
#7
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 8,460