why dont airlines do this?
 

there are zillions of stories of annoying passengers and annoying behaviors...

why dont airlines offer a free service to seat pax together based on there habits and needs?...

put the families together in one section since they are used to kids and there noise and antics...

put all the sleepers together so that they wake each other up less and non sleepers wont drive them insane...

put all the non sleepers together so that they dont get trapped in there seats by sleepers... and since there seatmates and them will probably get up allot...

put the talkers and drunks together so that they will actually be talking to people who want to talk...

put the laptop users together since they will be too busy staring at there own screens to stare at another....

put all the seniors together since they can have 2 way conversations about what it was like back in the day...and they can play bridge together...

i think it would make the flights more enjoyable and people will only be bothered by there own kind...

what do you FTers think?

I think that this is an interesting idea.

Three challenges come immediately to mind:

-- It's probably impractical logistically. Imagine all of the chaos in assigning seats and then processing all of the change requests at the gate.

-- It might create customer expectations that airlines will never be able to manage. (I can just see the threads on FT now: "I booked the sleeping section, but the guy next to me was talking, so I demand a refund, 100,000 miles, and 4 free upgrades for future flights as compensation.")

-- People might free-ride. Someone who wants to quietly work on his laptop might choose to sit with the sleepers -- good for him, perhaps a bother to the others.

At a minimum, I like the idea of a family section to keep all of the screaming kids together. I could see that being feasible (although various political-correctness issues might prove to be barriers).

i think its feasable to try without any guarantees from the op... it would be great for families to have the option...to hell with political correctness its a great idea...

sit families at the front of a section... then the kids screams will only fall on the wall infront...or some other kids ears...and the only thing kids will be able to kick is air or some other families seat...

In my dreams, but ^. I suggest that airlines offer pre-boarding of familes and make this one of the conditions.

I think it would be a great idea. Parents don't need to put up with glares from other passengers either.

Just like having F/J/Y, there could be a C fare (C for child) that would only qualify them to sit in a certain section of the aircraft.

I've never yet met the family who would choose to travel in close proximity to other children. I think airlines used to try (informally) to put children and babies near the back but on line check in has torpedoed this.

honestly they are most deserving of that place...and they already have kids w them, if we can put up with there crap and be somewhat forgiving then so can another parent....and kids have great potential for ruining flights for other pax..parents expect everyone to put up w there kids so why should they be spared from other peoples kids?

anther idea that was rhymed here sounded good... offer pre boarding for families....but limit them to a certain section...i still say back of the cabin is worse since there screams will project forward into our ears instead of a wall and more kids...and taht way you can put the sleepers in the back...

This recent thread covers a service with similar intent:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trave...e-seating.html

Sorry, but that's a hopelessly broad generalization of kids' behavior. We have been traveling with our daughters since our oldest (now 15) was 6 months old. For whatever reason, they have always been very peaceful travelers. When they were younger, they usually just watched what was going on around them or fell asleep. Now that they're older, they just read. They don't scream, they don't kick seats, they don't do anything to annoy other passengers. In fact, we've gotten numerous comments from FAs or other pax about how well-behaved they were (which our kids don't get: "What did I do that was so great?"). One guy even told my younger daughter that it was his best flight in a long time when he sat next to her -- he had more than enough arm and shoulder room due to her diminutive size, with none of the annoying downsides.

And yet in your world, we would have been sentenced to sitting in the midst of a high concentration of potentially ill-behaved kids, simply because of their age.

The fact is this -- ill-behaved passengers are a pain in the butt to sit next to, regardless of age. Sure, I hate sitting next to a screaming kid, but I have been equally annoyed by many ill-behaved "adult" passengers as well.

seems a bit more limited even though it sounds like a good concept... but i think airlines should have there own systems like this..

downers about satisfly...

1. you will be seated next to ppl you can tolerate but since satisfly only has control of seats that belong to there clients you can still wind up by kids or sleepers or drunks eitherway...

2. satisfly is obscure... while there service may help some a bit itll still be useless if the airlines dont arrange other pax properly... in other words its useless unless all pax participate. or sfly gets the whole seatmap to control..and thatll be hard since the website has no online booking mechanism...you might have limited flight options...

3. they seem more like an introduction service than an airline booking co...its not unusual for countries with somewhat more shy cultures to have more services geared towards getting ppl to hang out together...

if the airlines do it then pax will be more likely to be aware of it...or asked upon checkin if they want to let the airlines group them in exchange for pre boarding....

satisfly is still a great idea...airlines should borrow some things from sfs model...

its such a broad generalization that other fters agree...im not saying we should force families...im saying we should coax them to take an option to be seated like this by bribing them with preboarding or some other perk...

the biggest noisemakers on a plane seem to be kids and drunks for me...

Unfortunately, an a/c cabin is a small shared space and now usually packed to the gills. For airlines to try to separate paxs passed upon interest or type is not practical. And there are elites that travel with children (unforunately many times often not behaved children) that of course do not want to sit in the back row.

My suggestion is get to your airline's top status so that you will usually, if not almost always, be upfront and thereby lessen your chance of screaming children (won't totally eliminate it) or Jethro screaming to Ellie Mae about how excited he is to be on an airplane.

How ironic. Even families with kids don't want to sit near families with kids!

And yet, judging by this thread, it's pretty easy find FTers who agree that broad generalizations aren't a very good way of deciding who to punish....

And even if you make it voluntary, I suspect most FTers won't be happy. Most airlines reserve seats up front for their elites, likely because most elites like to be able to get off first in the event of tight connections. I suspect you'd have some unhappy elites if they're told they have a choice of sitting in back or sitting in the kids' section up front...all based on your studies of airplane acoustics.

Actually, I'd describe it as this: Families with well-behaved kids don't want to sit near families with ill-behaved kids.

They do offer this service; it's called coach.:D

for short range flights ill have to admit that you are correct...its just not worth it...

but it would work great on long hauls in a widebody aircraft with multiple sections in the same class... the elites can get the front of the frontmost section of the class they are flying in... and families and drunks and restless people can get the latter section. long hauls cost more and take more time...its better to make more effort to keep everybody happier on them...anyone can put up with nonsense for shorter durations of time better than longer ones...

look at econo on this jetairways 777er... http://i.slimg.com/seatguru/airlines..._777-300ER.gif

families drunks and restless who like to get up all the time can go at the back...since theyll be awake more and therefore use the lavs and visit the galley more ...why wouldnt a parent want to take advantage of that?....kids and drunks seem to process liquids pretty fast and parents often escort there kids to the lav. you are less likely to get trapped by a beverage cart when your kids gtg. families with young kids take longer to deplane...being back there allows them to take more time getting there stuff together and put there kids shoes back on...since some airlines board from the rear up you also get on first...you might not get to eat first...but if you order kids meals then kids will eat first...being closer to the lav means that you dont have to walk the entire section holding a soiled baby that needs a change... keeping all the more constant foot traffic in one area...

drunks have the amazing ability to tune out kids...they do fine sitting infront of the families...

elites can get there exit rows and the front most cabin and sleepers can go behind them...i guess everyone else can get the middle...

i think its logical and reasonable...im not some barbarian that likes to eat kids... :P

family section should be optional...but airlines could help by enticing parents with the ability to board first...