V-Flyer

From the Chicago Tribune

Another variation in the most efficient way to board a plane.

Though this might be harder to implement!

One way to cut boarding time by up to four minutes, according to a study presented at the 2009 Swiss Transport Research Conference, is to reduce from 15% to 5% the percentage of passengers carrying two or more pieces of luggage.

That is going to be chaos..... for Y!
hope European airlines dont do this!

M

Having seen what people bring on to flights in the States (because they don't want to pay for baggage ! ) and how this quickly fills up the overhead lockers, I still think that it is wishful thinking that boarding can be speeded up

buns

I honestly can't see this working. My experience from US flights is that Americans take as much luggage as they can and take ages getting themselves settled (usually trying to cram excess baggage in the overhead bins).

As a strong supporter of SEQ, I do think it rewards those who arrive at the airport early and check in first!

The main thrust of the article is to board by SEQ order.

The issue reducing the number of bags people are allowed is a side issue - though arn't you only allowed one bag on easyjet or ryanair?

What is interesting is that there is a whole field of mathematical study devoted to this.

As long as priority boarding takes place, and the flight takes off on time, I don't mind how they board the back

The problem I can see with boarding by SEQ number is one of discrimination. As those without internet will have higher numbers as they check in at the airport. Someone might have a good claim of indirect discrimination, as there could be a certain group of people who don't have the Internet as much as other groups, like those who have been alive longer, or even possibly a specific ethnicity. But then again, what could you argue that you are loosing out on...

Also (currently) the SEQ number isn't printed on the boarding stub, so this would cause problems if there is a gate where you don't go directly onto the aircraft after handing over your ticket.

The problem with SEQ boarding is, what happens if SEQ1 to, say, 8 are in the front rows.

No-one else can move until they are out of the aisle. Boarding by row, from the back is much more effective.

Darren Wheeler wrote:The problem with SEQ boarding is, what happens if SEQ1 to, say, 8 are in the front rows.

No-one else can move until they are out of the aisle. Boarding by row, from the back is much more effective.

Only if it enforced. How many times have we all been at the gate, the ground staff announce rows 58-68 to make their way to the front and everyone get up. v(

DarkAuror wrote:

Darren Wheeler wrote:The problem with SEQ boarding is, what happens if SEQ1 to, say, 8 are in the front rows.

No-one else can move until they are out of the aisle. Boarding by row, from the back is much more effective.

Only if it enforced. How many times have we all been at the gate, the ground staff announce rows 58-68 to make their way to the front and everyone get up. v(

or as BA did when i last returned with them from Paris CDG they called for passengers as follows

1. all requiring assistance
2. all Club Europe (board at your leisure)
3 Rows 22-10
4 all remaining pax

this on an Airbus A319 with 7 rows of Club Europe and only 22 rows on the plane.

this only left 12 seats to board on the 4th call

CHill710 wrote:

DarkAuror wrote:

Darren Wheeler wrote:The problem with SEQ boarding is, what happens if SEQ1 to, say, 8 are in the front rows.

No-one else can move until they are out of the aisle. Boarding by row, from the back is much more effective.

Only if it enforced. How many times have we all been at the gate, the ground staff announce rows 58-68 to make their way to the front and everyone get up. v(

or as BA did when i last returned with them from Paris CDG they called for passengers as follows

1. all requiring assistance
2. all Club Europe (board at your leisure)
3 Rows 22-10
4 all remaining pax

this on an Airbus A319 with 7 rows of Club Europe and only 22 rows on the plane.

this only left 12 seats to board on the 4th call

Oh that happened to me in Prague. I was the 4th option with cabin luggage and nowhere to store it because the overheads were filled by option 3. To save time, the CC allowed my case to be stored in the cockpit.

Luke085 wrote:As a strong supporter of SEQ, I do think it rewards those who arrive at the airport early and check in first!

Are you seriously suggesting the idea that if a Y class, or W class passenger had a higher sequence number than a J class, then they would be boarded first? ?|

AA has boarded by sequence for years, although at AA SEQ1 means PlatVIPs and First, down to SEQ4 or 5 which are cheap seats and no status.

I've found that it works very well.

I agree that it works for small domestic routes, such as those operated by American Eagle or similar, but I don't see it working for intercontinental routes.

Sequence boarding just discriminates against those that cannot do OLCI, or can't get to the airport early. I fail to see the benefits of such a system; boarding by class works perfectly well in my opinion.

RMAS wrote:

Luke085 wrote:As a strong supporter of SEQ, I do think it rewards those who arrive at the airport early and check in first!

Are you seriously suggesting the idea that if a Y class, or W class passenger had a higher sequence number than a J class, then they would be boarded first? ?|

As the article clearly states 'board by SEQ' only applies after 1st/bus, high status pax and those needing assistance have boarded.

(and surely the lower seqs would board first not the higher ones ...)

I was responding to Luke085s comment regarding Sequence boarding.

With regards to my definition of 'higher' sequence numbers, that is a habit from the Army - who would define SEQ1 to be a higher number than say, SEQ10 - as it's based on priority of importance.