Comfort wars

However, that argument fails somewhat when Air Asia X crams nine-across into the eight-across only A330 and the world’s most successful and now largest airline Emirates gets 10-across into its 777-300ERS with barely a whimper, as it wows passengers with the world’s best IFE and non-stop food.

The reality is as articulated by the late Peter Sutch, who led Cathay Pacific for decades — “if there is a square metre of space available we will put a seat on it”. I had been discussing claims by Airbus with him, at the time of duty free shops and even McDonalds on its proposed A3XX, which became the A380.

Cathay, among other airlines, wrote to Airbus telling it to cool down on the bold claims about what the A380 would offer passengers. But Airbus wasn’t the first in the ridiculous claims stakes.

That mantle rests squarely with McDonnell Douglas, which touted a disco on its DC-10 and a gym on its MD-12. It even built mockups of both. And Boeing got in on the act with its original 747, which had a downstairs lounge called the Tiger Lounge.

At the Airbus Innovations Days Airbus took a swipe at Boeing, claiming all its widebody aircraft featured 17in to 17.2in seating. This is true on the 737 and 747 with a 10-across configuration and in the nine-across 787 and ten-across 777. But aside from the 737 all these aircraft began life with more generous configurations.

In fact, most 777 and many potential 787 operators feature nine-across and eight across economy configurations. But while Airbus claims that all its operators have 18-inch wide seats this unfortunately is not the case. For example, China Southern has a 17.2in wide seat on most its Airbus types coupled with a generous 35in seat pitch.

China Eastern’s Airbus types feature 17.2in to 17.8in seats while Air China’s are 17.5in.
And tipping the entire Airbus pitch on its head Air China’s A330s have a 17.5in wide seat while its 777s are 18.5in. Air Canada’s 777s have 18.5in wide seats while its A330s have just 17.84in wide seats.

In fact, according to the Seat Guru website there is no consistency to seating other than that generally but not always, long-haul aircraft have more generous configurations than short haul. The one consistency is that a number of airlines, such as Air Berlin, buy identical seats across all Boeing and Airbus fleet types for both widebody and single aisle.

But adding to the muddle there also is wide variation in seat pitch between airlines. Most airlines seem to have seats that are set 31in – 32in apart.

Again, according to the data provided by Seat Guru, which while comprehensive is not a complete record of all seating configurations, seat pitch varies from 29in on Monarch Airlines to 35in on KLM.

Incidentally, the KLM generous configuration reflects the fact that the Dutch are the world’s tallest people with Australians being second — but Qantas has not seen fit to make its seating as generous.

Airbus head of aircraft interiors marketing Zuzana Hrnkova makes the interesting claim that the extra width of the airbus seating gives passengers the perception of more seat pitch but does not offer any scientific data.

She says an extra 1in in width translates to 1.6in of extra seat pitch perception. But this appears contrary to actual experience with Emirates, one of Airbus’s biggest customers, finding that a 17in seat with 34in seat pitch is better than a 18in seat with 31in seat pitch.

This evidence supports Boeing’s 737 MAX product marketing chief Joe Ozimek, who says the company defines “personal space” as pitch multiplied by seat width: “There’s not an exact trade between pitch and seat width but in testing we do find a wider seat tends to make people complain less about pitch. However, we find a strong correlation between having more pitch and people willing to tolerate a narrower seat.”

Using the multiplier concept an Emirates 17in wide seat at 35in pitch would give personal space of 595sq in. In comparison, a Qantas A380 seat is 18.1in but set at just 31in, which is 561.1sq in — about 6 per cent less personal space. This is the physical difference but perception is something else.

Australian Aviation couldn’t find any university studies on the specific subject (but we will keep trying . . . Editor).

However, it is well known one of the biggest complaints of economy travellers is seats being reclined into personal space, so another two inches of “real seat pitch” would seem a better bet, particularly with more people bringing their own entertainment devices, which are rested on tray tables.

The seat width debate has been stoked by the increasing girth of passengers, of which there is no denying. However of equal and possibly greater importance is the increasing height of the population, where seat pitch is vital, as a kneecap is far less forgiving or flexible than ample girth. From 1945 to 2000 the world’s population grew 7cm because of better nutrition and health.

Slamming regulators and airlines over width and height is a 1999 report from ICE Ergonomics, which found the seats were too narrow and seat pitch too close for safety. So while Airbus — and the travelling public — would love airlines to follow their suggestions of putting in wider seats that plea seems to be falling on deaf ears.

However, also in the aerospace giant’s arsenal is a new triple economy seat set for its A320 with the aisle seat being wider by two inches. This product is directed squarely at the obese passenger.

A wider seat in an economy triple is nothing new and was rolled out by United Airlines on its initial five across DC-8s in 1959 (see photo), which soon gave way to the standard 3-3 configuration. Nonetheless, the Airbus move is clever with two 17in wide seats, the same as the 737, plus outboard 20in wide seats that airlines can sell.

Ms Hrnkova says that if an airline sells the seat for an extra $20, which seems reasonable, it will generate $3 million per aircraft over 15 years.

Unmoved by this is one of the kings of ancillary revenue, founder and CEO of AirAsia Tony Fernandes, who says it’s too complicated for his reservation system. In Asia, where people generally are slimmer, the appeal may not be there but in the US it’s sure to be a hit.

However, at the Airbus Innovation Days there seemed to be far more interest among media and analysts in making the unpopular middle seat wider rather than the popular aisle seat.

Cabins of dreams

However leaving the extravagant claims aside there is no doubt the Airbus A350 and Boeing 787 are giant steps forward with features that accountants can’t tamper with, such as
the size of the windows — well, not yet anyway.

On both aircraft they are bigger – much bigger. And while both manufacturers at various times and ways have claimed the biggest windows for their new plastic fantastics, both are technically incorrect.

King of the windows in the jet era was the DC-8, no longer in regular passenger service, which sported windows that were 18 x 14.5 in. Interestingly when the DC-8 was designed economy class, only three years old on the North Atlantic, was spaced at 40in apart and thus that is the window spread on the DC-8, which became a major problem into the 1960s when spacing of seats slowly and surely reduced.

The 787 windows are 18.5 X 11in but are spaced only 20in apart, giving the 787 far more overall window area than the DC-8. On the 787-9 there are 112 windows compared with its direct competitor the A350, which has 116 and those were sized provisionally at 11.1 X 13.4in. Airbus has not responded to requests for updates on the actual size. This makes the 787 windows about 38 per cent bigger — and about 70 per cent larger than those on a A330/A340.

Larger windows are important for those who have a fear of flying, with numbers varying depending on country from 30 to 50 per cent of travellers. Surprisingly, Captain Miki Katz, who flies El Al 777s and runs a fear of flying website, says passengers with a fear of flying should get a window seat. Although seemingly counter-intuitive, he urges passengers to try it and feel the difference in sitting at a window and looking out as much as possible.

He says studies have shown that sitting in the aisle can increase the feeling of crowdedness because you see all the rows, all the passengers, but can’t see the windows, so your subconscious can increase the feeling of enclosure and density: “Looking out a window reveals infinite open spaces and a feeling of abundant air,” he claims.

Undeniably, the feeling of claustrophobia will be greatly diminished on the A350 and 787.
But the competition is so intense even the window shades are now a point of difference.
Ms Hrnkova says that unlike Boeing, the company is sticking with window shades, which can be “opened and closed in one second”.

Ms Hrnkova emphasises that on the A350 the traditional shade will block out the light completely, taking a swipe at passengers comments that the 787 electro chromatic shades do still let some light in at the lowest level and claiming: “The 787 window dimming function takes one minute to darken and two minutes to fully lighten.”

There’s no doubt that shape and colour in cabin architecture have become very important in the competitive landscape and the results, evidenced by Boeing’s ‘sky interior’, are remarkable. The A350 and 787 interiors take this to the cutting edge with superb use of LED mood lighting and styling to give a sense of roominess and grandeur. Lightning also is now also being used to lull passengers to sleep then awaken them slowly.

Ms Hrnkova suggests that the A350XWB has a more comfortable and efficient cabin at 220 in wide for nine-across seating “being 5in wider at eye, shoulder and armrest level than a 787’s 215in”. These claims are shades of the 777 vs A340 battle with highly contrasting seat configurations being touted.

Boeing launched an effective counter by simply stating the floor area for competing aircraft types. In the case of the 777-300ER it’s 264sq m and for the A340-600 237sq m, which led to the former having 42 more seats, with a nine-across economy configuration, by virtue of its significantly 30.9 in wider cabin.

The air we breathe

One area now for total agreement is pressurisation and air quality with Airbus and Boeing touting significant improvements. It’s probably no surprise to anyone that our bodies do not actually like being stuffed into an aluminum tube and shot through the air at 960km/h for even one hour, let alone for 14.

Until now, the tube has been pressurised to an altitude of 8,000ft and has extremely low humidity to help eliminate corrosion damage to the fuselage. But this takes a toll on passengers. This is why airlines encourage us to drink plenty of water and to leave the alcohol alone.

According to a comprehensive study into “The Possible Effects on Health of Aircraft Cabin Environments” commissioned by the British Civil Aviation Authority, some passengers may get mild hypoxia at 8,000ft, with symptoms including reduced exercise capacity, fatigue, mild hyperventilation, headache, insomnia and swelling of the extremities. While the effects are mild they do combine to cause varying levels of discomfort.

The enormous strength and non-corrosive properties of the A350’s and 787’s reinforced carbon-fiber fuselages have given designers the opportunity to eliminate some of the significant factors that cause jet lag.

The aircraft have a pressurisation altitude of 6,000ft and humidity levels of between 10 and 15 per cent.

Boeing’s chief engineer systems for the 787 program Michael Sinnett told Australian Aviation that the 787 design team set out to “look at all the factors that make passengers more comfortable – both physical and physiological”.

Boeing ran a study at Oklahoma State University using US Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine methodology, characterising 68 possible altitude symptoms to determine comfort levels at various pressurisation levels. The 500 survey participants experienced a 20-hour flight regime in a cabin simulator pressurised to five different altitude equivalents.

Each level was tested nine times and participants sat in standard economy-class seats, ate typical airline food, watched movies and slept as they would during a real flight.
The results were conclusive with participants feeling less achy, more relaxed and more comfortable with the 6,000ft pressurisation. Mr Sinnett added: “We found that there was little difference in the effect on passengers from sea level to 6,500 ft.”

Airbus and Boeing are making much of the air in their new offerings. The real challenge is to get volatile organic compounds (VOCs) out of the cabin as both companies have found that VOCs, more than humidity, affect how people feel at the end of a flight.

Aircraft manufacturers have done a good job with airborne particles using high-efficiency particulate filters but getting gaseous contaminates out of the air is more of a challenge.
VOCs dry you out while alcohol is an astringent and having it in the air is a significant problem. Even hand wipes used at meal time release alcohol into the air. Add to the mix hairspray and perfume and you have a potent cocktail.

Both A350 and 787 sport VOC/ozone removers that will it is claimed eliminate the problem. and Ms Hrnkova also touts the A350’s precision air management system, which will deliver a “draught-free environment, homogeneous temperature and total cabin air changed every 2-3 minutes”.

Connectivity rules

Airbus is pushing the A350’s fourth generation connectivity architecture with fibre optics and a bandwidth five times greater than current generation aircraft, although it has not opted for Wi-Fi distribution of IFE but uses fibre optic cable. It says the fibre optic cable will allow all passengers to receive HD IFE.
Panasonic and Thales are IFE and communication providers for the A350. The Panasonic package includes AVOD, eXPhone in-flight mobile phone service, eXConnect broadband internet access and the Panasonic Airborne Television Network, which broadcasts live news and sports.

Thales’s contribution is the TopSeries AVANT seatback system, which it says has the highest standard of reliability and has 256GB of content storage at the seat. This independent storage capability coupled with added redundancy within the head-end solid state digital servers adds more protection against any dark seats, according to the company. It says also that the AVANT system means passengers will see no electronics box under the seat.

Thales claims power and weight are cut by 30 per cent and 20 per cent respectively and that reliability is increased. Processing power within the AVANT smart video display unit has increased speed of up to 30 per cent compared to earlier units. New chip sets support both 2D and 3D acceleration.

OnAir has been selected as the platform provider for in-flight communication services based on Inmarsat’s SwiftBroadband service, which offers GSM and GPRS for voice, data and internet. OnAir also offers telemedicine, credit card authentication,and airline in-flight portals.

Airbus adds that the fourth generation IFE means the large boxes under seats are replaced by much slimmer, smaller equipment freeing up “foot space”.

There is no doubt the A350 and 787 are giant strides forward for passengers, while airlines are desperate for the fuel economics to help bring them back to profitability. Boeing has now delivered its 14th 787 — with 840 to go!

And the most relevant news came in the first week of June when Boeing rolled out its 66th 787, destined for All Nippon Airways, the first that does not require expensive rework. Finally, confidence is coming that the 787 is back on track.

However, the A350’s delivery schedule remains shrouded in concerns that there will be further slips in the production schedule. Airbus executives have been candid in their assessment, admitting the program has challenges.

Airbus head of A350 XWB program Didier Evrard says entry into service is tight but remains feasible, adding: “The schedule we have internally and externally, with our customers and suppliers, is the same. It is transparent. Everybody is on the same page.”

But the 787 experience is haunting the industry and Airbus, many doubting not so much the rollout of next year of the A350-900 but the first flight and particularly the ramp-up to ten a month within four years.

Airbus says that the A350-900 will fly in the first quarter of 2013 with entry into service in the first half of 2014. Like the 787, the A350 can’t come soon enough!