Hope for Airbus Yet!

Reply Subscribe

Page 2 of 4

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

03-11-2015, 09:20 AM

#11

Blockoutblockin

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Feb 2009

Position: 73 CA EWR

Posts: 514

Quote:

Originally Posted by DashTrash

I think Boeing should introduce the concept of the XWNB (Extra Wide Narrow Body). With 2x2x2 seating configuration in coach with a twin aisle configuration for ease of boarding of pax. No dreaded middle seat! That configuration would help turn times and allow more frequency with each aircraft.

It's funny you mention this. About 3 years ago I was told by a congressional member of the aviation sub-committee that Boeing has the plans to your concept already on the drawing board.

03-11-2015, 09:58 AM

#12

Larry in TN

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jul 2008

Posts: 864

Quote:

Originally Posted by DashTrash

I think Boeing should introduce the concept of the XWNB (Extra Wide Narrow Body). With 2x2x2 seating configuration in coach with a twin aisle configuration

Which airline would be first to order it in a single-aisle, 4x4 configuration?

03-11-2015, 10:30 AM

#13

Firsttimeflyer

Stuck Mic

Joined APC: Dec 2013

Posts: 1,059

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry in TN

Which airline would be first to order it in a single-aisle, 4x4 configuration?

Why no go for standing room only. Or maybe they will hang some slings from the ceiling where you kind of hang there like rock climbing gear!

03-11-2015, 11:47 AM

#14

oldmako

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: May 2009

Position: The GF of FUPM

Posts: 3,073

When one considers how wide humans have become, and how much wider they most assuredly will get, then a wider tube (and seats) is a no brainer. While steerage in a Bus is tight, steerage in the 737/757 tube is just torture. Unless of course, you're a jockey or fitness bunny.

Edwin Colodny wanted a twin aisle semi narrow body 25 years ago. The idea is long past due. I'm certain that I'll retire before I ever ride on one.

Last edited by oldmako; 03-11-2015 at 12:29 PM.

03-11-2015, 12:24 PM

#15

Surfinonreserve

New Hire

Joined APC: Mar 2015

Posts: 4

They are replacing all our seats that have padding so they can shoehorn in more slimline park bench seats and you think our management would want an extra aisle where seats could go? Riiiiight.

03-11-2015, 12:32 PM

#16

oldmako

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: May 2009

Position: The GF of FUPM

Posts: 3,073

If the tube was designed and constructed with two aisles and three sets of two seats across, there would be no way to add seats along its width. The can mess with the pitch and legroom all they want, the seats width is much more difficult to change.

03-11-2015, 01:15 PM

#17

spaaks

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2013

Posts: 869

Why wouldn't they shrink the 787 to the 200-240 seat range? common type, parts...etc. It's already composite so it'll be lighter (there's your extra range) and it's Way cheaper than starting from scratch,

03-11-2015, 02:07 PM

#18

SUX4U

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Oct 2009

Position: B756 FO

Posts: 1,288

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaaks

787SP? 200 Passengers with a range of 10,000 NM? I like your style...

03-11-2015, 03:59 PM

#19

sailingfun

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Feb 2008

Posts: 19,704

Quote:

Originally Posted by DashTrash

2 aisles with six seats per row would get killed on a cost basis by the standard 3X3 single isle seating. The airframe would be horribly inefficient on a per seat basis. There is a reason almost every airline now is trying to use every sq inch of floor space for more seats.