Hard to know I’m falling for Ryanair’s particular form of shock-PR (fat tax, toilet tariff) or whether it’s true that the low-cost carrier is stripping down its ’service-lite’ flights even further.
It is said to be exploring the possibilities of of “vertical seating” at the back of its Boeing 737s on flights of under 90 minutes. Vertical seating would leave passengers not quite standing — they’d have “something like a stool to lean on or sit on,” according to Stephen McNamara. (Imagine a bar stool, just 30,000 feet higher.)
What was considered a hare-brained scheme a few years back is now being
entertained by at least a couple of carriers. The original idea was
rumoured to have come out of Airbus (which quickly denied it), then resurrected by Chinese airline Spring, which has already ordered 14 standing-room jets from Airbus, which would allow it to raise capacity by 40 per cent.
But how does it stack up as an innovation? Is it the start of something great, or akin to finding out your bank’s offshored its entire operation to Asia?
Ryanair’s doesn’t need the passengers, particularly — it has the highest passenger numbers among international airlines (57,647 — Southwest, with nearly double that number, is the global leader). But it would allow the carrier to pack planes with 50 percent more people while cutting costs by 20 percent.
One report into the original idea worked out that an Airbus A380 “Superjumbo” (pictured) which seats 500, could carry 853 people upright. And the cost of operating an airline (and they’re rising) makes that a tempting proposition.(The story goes that Richard Branson, when he started Virgin Atlantic, was already a billionaire. Someone asked him, “How do you become a millionaire?” and he replied: “Start an airline”.)
Would passengers bother? Of course they’d pay less to stand (at first), but fares on Ryanair are already rock-bottom (£4 to Parma) so even airport and fuel surcharges might not persuade them to almost-stand for an hour plus. On the other hand, since Ryanair and Southwest top the passenger rankings already, they’ve proven that customers don’t care as much about comfort as they do cost.
Even so, this looks like one idea that’s been cooked up without reference to customers. If it’s less appealing, it’s because it’s an innovation that’s driven by necessity, a desire to cut costs. It doesn’t fit the boom-time innovation mould — products that articulated needs we didn’t even know we had (the iPod, or even budget airlines themselves.)
But maybe this is what innovation looks like in an era of uncertainty — disruptive and initially unpopular. What may start out at the back of the plane may find its way to all but the first-class cabins. In other words, upright flying is probably part of our future.
(But if you still think it’s a joke, check out MikeLynch’s link to comedian Bob Newhart’s routine,)
(WTL Photos, CC2.0)
