
Budget airlines have finally hit rock bottom – cheap standing seats on flights would be a disaster
Terrifying travel news this week, that a handful of unnamed airlines are considering introducing standing-only seats on planes.
4
4
Despite looking better suited to a death-defying rollercoaster than a two-hour plane journey, it's been suggested that they could become be the norm for cheap flights, with it becoming a 'privilege' to get a proper seat.
The uncomfortable-looking designs by Aviointeriors have a slanted, saddle-like base that allows the passengers to still be strapped in, while standing upright.
it's the third version of the design, which was first revealed by Aviointeriors as far back as 2010 and has since gone through a number of 'improvements.'
They claim to take up much less space than a standard economy seat, with just just 23 inches compared to 31 inches.
That'll be music to low-cost airlines ears, who presumably are envisioning more crammed passengers to squeeze cash from - after repeatedly shrinking legroom, chair width and luggage allowances over the last 20 years.
I love to walk around a cabin to stretch my legs, but I hardly want to be standing the whole time.
Standing might even be preferable over this bizarre, half leaning situation.
It reminds me of that awkward perch against a pub garden fence when you run out of seats - something never comfortable but acceptable after a few pints.
Maybe these are the seats for those passengers enjoying some Wetherspoon beers before a flight, who will barely notice whether they are upright when boarding.
I am all for a cheap flight - notoriously never checking in a suitcase to avoid any extra fees - but there are some things that I think are a necessity on a flight.
Plane seats of the future – with no tray tables, TV screens or seat pockets and full screen dividers between each row
And one of them? Being allowed to sit down.
The rollercoaster like seat certainly would be just as uncomfortable during turbulence as a rollercoaster seat is when being spun and flung around corners.
And I don't expect them to be a 'cheaper' option despite Ryanair's Michael O'Leary previously touting the idea of £1 standing seats in 2012.
After all, Ryanair and easyJet's cheapest fares are now around £15 - but this comes without any luggage, unlike good old days when it had a free suitcase.
Low-cost airlines ditched these back in 2018 - but this has hardly been passed onto the consumer in the way of price, seeing as flights back then could be found for £4.99.
So with free luggage gone, and it appears cheap sit-down seats to be next, who knows what' else could gone. else is around the corner.
4
It was Ryanair who once suggested they would charge passengers to use the bathroom.
Perhaps we'll have to pay to have a back to our seats, after a bizarre back-less easyJet seat went viral back in 2019.
Thankfully we seem to be a way off from them being rolled out.
Aviointeriors confirmed that while there has been "interest" in the seat, no airlines have actually bought them.
Don't expect to see them on long-haul flights either, as it's suggested it will only be on flights less than two hours.
But who knows, it's one step closer to removing seats all together, making the term "cattle class" that bit more apt.
The only upside? Don't expect someone wanting to take the seat next to you if it's empty.
Hey, it could be the latest plane hack to getting a row to yourself.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
2 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
I'm a pilot. This is the REAL terrifying reason the skies are now so dangerously turbulent... and airlines aren't doing enough to keep you safe
Veteran British Airways pilot Alastair Rosenschein remembers his most harrowing brush with turbulence as if it happened yesterday. It was 1988, and he was flying a Boeing 747 packed with 400 passengers from London to Nairobi when the aircraft was violently jolted as it passed over the mountains of northeastern Italy.


Times
22 minutes ago
- Times
Whatever Keir Starmer says, Heathrow's third runway is a folly
F or a flight to nowhere, at least it's a popular one. Heathrow's third runway is back on the radar again: a reheated version of its pre-Covid plan, only this time with a jumbo £49 billion price tag. It's got a political tailwind, too, with the PM saying he'll do 'whatever it takes' to get 'spades in the ground' by 2030 and Rachel Reeves bizarrely making it her No 1 growth project. Yet there are good reasons Britain has been failing to build this landing strip since 1968. And none of them have gone away, whatever the breezy assurances of the Heathrow boss Thomas Woldbye: the fellow who was famously sparko when the North Hyde substation fire shut the airport. In fact, some have got trickier. Back then, no one was contending with 'net zero' or the joys of the M25 — least of all putting all 12 lanes in a tunnel and having the planes land on top.


Times
24 minutes ago
- Times
A third runway at Heathrow is a huge undertaking — but necessary
Safe to say that if one was choosing a location for London's main international airport from scratch it would not be on ground in west London occupied by a hamlet called Heath Row. An airport there would be too boxed in by the westward advance of London, its expansion constrained by ever more hostile residents, commercial premises and motorways. There is also the issue of wind. Prevailing winds in the United Kingdom come from the southwest. For reasons of performance and safety, aircraft typically take off and land into the wind. That means airliners arriving at Heathrow are descending from the east 70 per cent of the time, over the centre of London. That means more noise, and a tiny additional safety risk, for Londoners living under the flightpath. A busy flightpath it is, too. On average there are some 650 arrivals at Heathrow each day, the first roaring in from the Far East as early as 4.30am.