So this is something I’ve been thinking about looking at widebody seat maps: Whenever a plane is a dual-aisle 8-abreast configuration, it is always laid out in a 2-4-2 configuration, almost never 3-2-3 which would take up the same internal width, just shifting each aisle inward by a seat.
Example: 8-abreast A330 economy class:
Admittedly my knowledge on the most efficient seating arrangements is limited, but wouldn’t 3-2-3 be preferable compared to 2-4-2? It would shift the middle seats toward the edges of the cabin, to the windows in the same relative position as a narrowbody, and would turn the innermost seats into aisle seats; all of which I imagine would reduce the claustrophobic feeling of both the middle seats, which are now only one seat away from a window, as well as the innermost seats as they would now have direct aisle access.
I’d imagine this would also not make a significant impact on boarding and deboarding times, since the aisles themselves are the limiting factors as opposed to how many seats are on one side of the aisle. There would be three people coming into each aisle from the window side and only one from the center of the plane as opposed to two on each side, but that would be negligible compared to the time it actually takes to make it through the aisle to the door.
Also they wouldn’t need to separately manufacture a four-abreast seat row and can just use the three and two abreast seats they already use on narrowbodies.
The fact that we almost never see 3-2-3 seating in commercial aviation makes me think there’s a massive drawback that is completely escaping me. What do you think? Why don’t we see this more often and what are the actual disadvantages of this?
Not an expert on this, but I’d assume one thing is that in 3-2-3 two people need to stand up and give way if the person in the window seat wants to stretch their legs or go to the toilet. 2-4-2 only one person has to get out of the way in all situations. Would guess that’s actually somewhat important in widebodies since those are used on longer routes, and having to stand up twice as often in the aisle seat would be something of an inconvenience.
There’s probably more, I’d guess that would also affect boarding times and so on, but this is the first thing that comes to mind.
Ha. I’ve had this showerthought too last time I flew international. Reducing passenger jumping annoyances were the most logical reason.
Another was that (in my observation) people tend to not fly international alone. 2-4-2 can accommodate a lot of couples, up to a family of four without separating them. Again, fewer annoyances.
As an aside, I’ve been told that budget Airlines have been reconfiguring their 8-abreast to fit 9 (3-3-3 with narrower seats). I’m lucky enough to have not been in one.
3-3-3? Why not 4-4-1 and then sell the lone seat as Premium Alone™? Because God knows people would kill for that seat.
Please delete this post before they see it.
I’m afraid United Airlines representatives have already offered me a job as a consulant. Sorry buds, looks like I’m flying business class for life 😎
1-7-1 to maximize the number of Premium Alone seats, with the added bonus of symmetry and balance
Very much this. Think about it from the perspective of selling tickets. If I were shopping for a ticket from multiple airlines, I’d pick a window seat in a 2-4-2 over a window seat in a 3-2-3 every time if cost was comparable. Middle seats are crappy no matter what so I don’t see being the middle seat in a row of 3 being better than 4.
Many people have commented on the convenience factor for the passengers, so I won’t retread that ground, but another aspect has to do with the moment of inertia and center of gravity of the system.
In 3-2-3 arrangement, weight is located farther from the geometric center of the plane. This means variation in passenger weight can shift the center of gravity around more, and the pilot wants that center of gravity as close to the plane’s center as possible for a stable flight.
As far as moment of inertia goes, it’s easier to roll the plane if weight is closer to the center, and planes rolling helps planes steer. Granted, there’s not a whole lot up there that needs to be dodged with lightning reflexes, but if the plane crashes, it’s a Very Big Deal, so they work in every precaution they can.
Having each isle have 2 seats either side makes more sense than having 1 and 3. Especially when it comes to serving people. You have to lean over one person rather than 2 which is obviously easier. At least that’s my guess, I’m no professional
I can imagine it also makes the overhead bin space more efficient. In a 2-4-2 each bin-space-per-row serves 2 people, whereas in a 3-2-3 the inboard bins only serve 1 seat, with the outboard bins serving 3, while the available space is highest in the middle of the plane. You also can’t shift that and tell outboard passengers to use inboard bins, because the aisle will then be offset from the bins.
More generically, to make the most of your available volume, you’d want to basically have the aisle out as far to the side as headroom while walking through them allows.
Have you never flown in a 3-seat by the window for 10 hours? Thank the aircraft manufacturers that they tried to get away with that shit.
With 2-4-2 you have to cross over 1 seat maximum to get to an aisle from each seat. With 3-2-3 both window seats would have to cross 2 seats to get to an aisle, and you would have to move two people to get out instead of 1. That would be more awkward when going to the bathroom or entering/exiting the plane
I realize you addressed this but I think window seats being buried 2-deep is not negligible, especially in the event of an emergency.
Maybe many people travel as couple than in 3s.
