• Railing5132@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    “would not be in that position”?!? What version of reality are you smoking where these seats are gonna freaking move to vertical?

    Edit: on further inspection, you’re gonna go full ATM if you sit upright. You’re so low to the floor to accommodate the upper decker that your knees would be in your chest cavity if they were on the floor. Frack every bit of this idea in the neck, sideways, with a screwdriver.

    Have you ever been in an airliner? “upright an locked in their vertical positions” - ever heard that? Putting goddamned laz-e-boys in the middle of an airliner is gonna lead to corpses in the event of a catestrophoc accident. (not that it would stop the airline industry, if it could)

    • Xenon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I found a 3d render of the proposed cabine layout here it looks tight but otherwise pretty standard if you ask me, except for the two levels of course.

      • Railing5132@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The moment of inertia on that upper deck is going to snap those seats like a twig. While I’m sure there’s airline execs foaming at the mouth and lobbyists pushing wheelbarrows of money, I’ll drive before I get in one of those.

        Also, more passengers plus less overhead bin storage means less cargo hold capacity, meaning air cargo (a valuable income stream, particularly on transcontinental or transoceanic flights, where the widebodies would be most used) would be cut back by more checked bags. And more discontent by pax that now have to pay for checked bag fees.

        I dunno, I just don’t see the benefits.