Bunk beds for eco class?
 

Is this the right place to suggest innovations to airlines? :rolleyes:

Mostly I fly economy, with some occasional upgrades to C.
I really don't need all the service, the only thing I am interested in is to be able to lie flat and stretch my legs.
One of the reasons why C is so much more expensive, is the space needed for the seats. Recently I flew A340-600 with the lavatories downstairs. In the same area is also space for some cosy air crew rest bunk beds.
Would it be feasible to offer some bunk beds for eco passengers on the lower deck for a little bit extra? Could be even purchased on the flight.
How does this sound? Feasible? Interested?

Interesting idea.

Since you are in the technology forum, I hoped to see a proposal based on a comparison of occupied volumes, seat vs bunk bed.

I estimate that bunk beds take a little bit more than Y seats. Given a seat pitch of 32-34 inches, the space of two seats in a column is just not enough for the length of a bed. With two levels of beds we would need a little bit more total space.
My assumption was that there is some spare space in the cargo area. This might be wrong.
Anyway, I miss innovation in the area of economy class comfort, C and Y are moving apart. Certainly there is something possible. Passeners could be "stacked" horizontally with some density, utilizing the cabin height. There could be common seating areas for the meals, allocated on reserved time slots.
Airbus, hire me, I will draft something nicely for the A380! ;)

Let's ask the folks in TravelBuzz.

One of the issues is that demand for bunks will be massively greater on overnight flights. If we imagine an airline which does routes which are predominantly east-west and back. Unless you can convert the configuration to no or few sleepers for the westbound, it's a non-starter. Alternatively we need a true RTW airline which could configure its eastbound fleet with bunks and its westbound fleet conventionally.

Oddly, SAA is one airline which operates a significant number of turns which are exclusively overnight. This could work for them, were they to want to be innovative.

Not a new topic.
Same suggestion from a couple of months ago.
And from 2006

Lufthansa made a concept like this ages ago but then didn't do anything about it. They suggested triple bunks, which I'd imagine wouldn't take up an awful lot more space than 3 seats, with a premium of £120 over normal seats.

I assume they dropped all plans related to this though (assuming they were even serious in the first place!).

It really makes no sense to have just one level of seats across a big plane that has a lot of volume. A 747 could have two to several levels of bunk beds depending on where you are (near the window or in the middle of the plane). It would be far more comfortable, west-bound or east-bound, to be able to lay down than sit in seats crammed in.

Thanks! The first referenced thread is quite interesting! It also seems that there is a demad for "no frills, just lie flat" option.

I also share concerns that people want to sit or have to sit during take offs and landings. On long haul flights we have to eat and a bed is not a good place for this.
Therefore bunk beds could be an addition in the cargo area for e.g. 30% of the Y seating capacity, instead of converting the normal seats. Has this been thought through? I guess evacuation time and space in the cargo area are issues, but otherwise it should be possible. I would immediately prefer the airline offering an "eco sleeper class"! :)

...not to mention the increased opportunity of joining the mile high club :D

Lots of issues to be worked out surely.... to make it viable for the airline it would have to be "get in your bed and stay there" pretty much.... not as if there would be a seat you could be in part of the time....

...the bunks would have to be , what, 3 decker? (To fit the same number in the same space) Getting in and out of the upper (and for some folks, the lower) bunks could be difficult.

Would the various authorities allow pax to be lying down for takeoff/turbulence etc? What sort of restraints would be required and so on...

Any reduction in pax load to fit these bunks would , fairly, lead to fare increases... as with the Y+ (Premium Economy) products that are around right now...

Would the people saying they want these bunks be prepared to pay for them, if capacity was actually reduced onboard as a result of their introduction?

A likely scenario IMO... unless we go for the pre 1820 Royal Navy arrangement of hammocks slung every 14"!!! :D

If I assume the standard seat width is 18", it's only possible when replacing 4 or 5 seats. So only middle sections could be converted into beds.

I don't see any problems in turbulences, if you are strapped in tight. But for take-off and landing, where you might have to get out of your seat fast, there needs to be a solution.

Although I like the fact of a flat bed in Y (and would consider long haul in there) this would come closer to cattle class.

Innovative idea's like this is what airlines need. With the overall experience in Y between operators becoming less different , features like this could really set you apart. In worse case, it's good marketing. Would be something I would expect Virgin to do.
NZ is offering a bed in Y (they turn 3 seats into a bed for 2 people). (has NZ implemented this yet? If so, why no trip report?)

Can someone enlighten me as to when an A340 has had toilets downstairs.

The Skycouch on NZ is 5' 1" long ..at best. So while it is no doubt more comfortable for 2 people than a single seat... to suggest it is a "bed" for 2 people is pushing it a bit. The price premium can be substantial too....