You can't control how the airline orchestrates boarding, but you can control how you board. It's much less stressful to stay seated in the lounge while everyone waits in line, then jump up at the end.
I understand the impulse to get on the plane, but it's irrational if you aren't using the overhead bins. (As a rule, I do not. I always check my bag plane-side.) Getting on the plane earlier won't get you to your destination faster. So, don't stress about it, sit down and relax.
Although, my attitude could end up screwing up these optimized methods. But I don't think it hurts in the back-of-the-plane-first method.
I like to get on early if I'm not already super comfortable. A: Get comfy, get drinks, and get to sleep or into a book. B: Turn off all the TVs in vision since half the people don't actually watch and won't figure out how to turn them on.
Also I've found that a lot of people have an affinity for taking the better seats (last row of front cabin on a lot of United's fleet has space under the seat in addition to in front). While you can let them know and ask them to move, it makes you feel a bit like a jerk, especially if they switched seats to sit next to a companion. Or if they got "confused" and took the other side to avoid the sun and then say "oh I'm sorry, do you mind taking mine or shall I move my stuff over to the other side of the cabin"?
This doesn't seem to happen in proper First cabins.
This is how I do it for assigned seats when I have no overhead bag, but it sucks for Southwest - You will get stuck in the middle of the worst two people to sit next to. You also can't sit with other people.
Also, many people don't want to check their bags because most airlines now charge $15-25 to do so. Also, when I don't check bags, I don't have to wait in line for the baggage check at my departure, and I don't have to wait at the baggage claim when I arrive. For the short flights I take most often, this extra time can be almost as long as the flight itself.
On the flip side, since I always travel pretty light, I never check baggage (and I still have the smallest carry-ons...) and a little more stress at the beginning of the flight to ensure I get overhead bin space, means that at the end of the flight I can leave the plane and walk out the front door, rather than waiting 10-20 for the baggage to show up.
If I need to bring enough stuff to require check baggage however, I am always the last to board the plane.
It's funny that these models all assume you have to seat first class first. Even if I'm flying first class, I still prefer to get on the plane last. The way people board airplanes seems to be the most irrational of all consumer behavior.
It's hard to wait long enough though. They start with "final, final, final boarding calls" prematurely and you still end up waiting in line for 5-10 minutes in the gateway even if you're the very last person to check in. I'd still prefer to stand for a few minutes than spend extra time crammed into that awful seat.
The same with going out of the plane. There is no reason to join the crowd in the middle, especially if you checked your bags. The sooner you leave the plane, the longer you will wait on airport for bags.
We once did a transposed Steffen on a high school marching band trip. Crew said they'd never seen a plane fill that quickly. Unfortunately, this is harder to coordinate when the passengers aren't all members of an organization that practices standing in lines.
One factor that has to be taken into account is the "social" one, i.e. how can we enforce that the ultra-fast amazingly optimal sitting scheme will be used.
Let's conduct a thought experiment. My grandma (that has difficulty hearing) is boarding a plane. Try explaining to her, in a sensible and efficient manner that only the people at the windows should get in first.
Ok, maybe my grandma is an extreme example. But think of a first time flyer. Lots of people would be confused.
Also, as already stated, people that travel together sit side by side. Are you going to split the young couple of newly weds during boarding? Is that really sensible? Or the mother and her five kids?
The main takeaway that I get is that you should let people get in without any pre-ordering. Unless you can devise a socially acceptable way to enforce outside-in boarding, that is. I'm not.
You see, the bottom line for me is that simulations are really valuable, but not taking into account the human factors involving the business, how the people actually consume your product, you can have great ideas that work on excel and flunk marvelously on the market.
"Now boarding people requiring special assistance or those with priority seating"
"now boarding seats A and F."
"now boarding seats B and E"...
Seems simple enough. Priority seating would just be a box that you check off, only available to people travelling in groups. Seat these people as far back and as close to a wall as possible.
The article actually addresses some of the cases you mentioned - like families and couples - and proposes exceptions for those. You could conceivably implement a check-in time boarding order assignment algorithm which takes such factors into consideration. This would result in a slightly longer than ideal boarding time, due to congestion in the aisles, but still better than the current scenarios.
I've been on a few airlines that make people line up in roughly some order according to a number on a boarding pass. I'm sure a couple people are out of order on every flight, but if the airline is already going through the effort of lining people up in some order, why not make it the best order?
Easy. Print icons/ideograms on tickets, in addition and preferably next to ticket numbers.
Print triangles for window seats, squares for middle seats, circles for aisle seats.
Print arrow up for modulo 4 numbered seats, arrow right for non-modulo 4 even numbered seats, arrow down for modulo 3 numbered seats, and arrow left for non-modulo 3 odd numbered seats.
Everyone gets two and only two easily identified symbols in addiion to their ticket number, which suffice for all of the methods outlined in the article.
I always have to laugh when, at the end of a flight, the majority of passengers jump up and elbow their way into the aisle, even though in many cases they'll be standing there for at least 5 minutes.
While sitting in the aisle seat, I've had passengers that were sitting beside me fall into my lap as they try to jostle their way by, just to get a place in the (stationary) line.
What's even funnier is when you see these people waiting around the baggage claim 10 minutes later.
When I was a teenager we did "experiments" during boarding of busses and in other similar situations. We made people jostle even more by standing in the back and saying, in a stage whisper, things like "Hey, there are still free seats!". It worked, sometimes even too well.
I elbow my way into the aisle because, like anyone over 6 feet, I don't fit comfortably into an airline seat and would dearly like to stand up. I would also like people to figure out how to get their bags out of the overhead and find their children before the aisle in front of them is clear, but I'll settle for being able to stretch.
The simplest way to avoid standing in line is to be fashionably late. You sit and read a book until everyone else has boarded, and only then do you go through.
I'm always surprised how everyone rushes to stand in line the moment boarding starts. Rationally speaking they should wait until the last reasonable moment to board, because the seat in the terminal is more comfortable than the one in the airplane.
This works great when you have checked luggage, or if you use a non roll aboard bag, which I’ve moved to doing. Otherwise, it’s a race to get available overhead space - in part because of increased checked bag fees, and airlines not enforcing proper sized carry-ons.
Though, as others have pointed out, carry-ons can put a damper on the idea, I tend to do this. Even before carry-ons became a consideration, I've been mystified by people that want to get on the plane first. Umm, more time in the aluminum tube in an uncomfortable seat? No thanks, I'll wait. I understand that it may not work for everyone, but I typically check everything but a laptop bag, and get on as late as I can. Grab a latte after getting off the plane, and stand by the luggage output for 15 minutes while sipping my delicious (okay, it's the airport: barely palatable) coffee beverage.
Even today when you get booked flights with no carry-on room, the gate agent comes on the PA: "if you check your carry-on, we'll let you board first!" If I check my bag and don't have a carry-on anymore, and I have an assigned seat, how about I board dead last instead? Because I personally don't view being first on the plane as a reward.
I do this as well, at least when flying economy, because I want to spend as little time in that plane seat as possible. Overhead bin space has rarely been a problem, so I take that risk. Maybe I've been lucky or maybe it's because my carryon is fairly small and soft (squashable!)
Better even: I once waited by mistake until the departure time instead of the boarding time. They search for your case in the checked luggage to expell it. If you arrive before they found your case, you're allowed to take the flight.
If you only have one bag that fits under the seat. That would be the best policy. Otherwise, getting there earlier to avoid the people that refuse to pay for a checked bag is better. [Overhead space is quickly taken]
This had been known for a while. Yet there are different considerations besides fastest boarding time. First, people traveling together tend to sit next to each other, so ordering by "columns" instead of rows breaks them apart in the queue which may be either uncomfortable or downright infuriating if you travel with young kids.
I can imagine that letting passengers take their seats at random results in pretty fragmented available seating so if you travel as a large group and want to seat together, this might be a problem too.
> First, people traveling together tend to sit next to each other, so ordering by "columns" instead of rows breaks them apart in the queue
You can order by column but still let families together, for example with United you can board with your group/family's lowest group number. This means a 1K with boarding group 1 can bring in his wife and kid (who are somewhere between 3 and 5 if they don't have status) on the plane all at the same time. This way you can fill up whole rows at once.
Every airplane I've ever been on has boarded front to back (which I've always found non-sensical), but the article says most board back to front. Am I going crazy, or are Delta, US Airways, and American Airlines not in that "most US airlines"?
From my experience, the boarding problem is pretty specific to the US, where everyone seems to have carry on bags perfectly sized to fit the overhead compartments, of which there are not enough to satisfy everyone's need to not check in any baggage (and thus avoid check in charges)
In my opinion the solution would probably be to discourage as much bulk in carry on, rather than herding cats at the gate.
Sounds nice in theory, but it totally breaks down with airlines' policies of charging for checked luggage. Getting onboard first guarantees you a coveted overhead bin spot, aisle clogging be damned.
Do any airlines charge to check luggage once the overhead bins are full? I'm generally too lazy to board in the proper order, and I always get my would-have-been-a-carry-on checked for free.
I'm sure it could be improved further by a re-design of aircrafts. We could board a capsule beforehand or make the entire aircraft with falcon-walls. But the Steffen method sounds pretty good to :)
I wonder if you could build a passenger pod which attaches to the airframe. The pods get swapped when the plane comes in to the terminal. The new pod would already be fully boarded, and deplaning people on the arriving pod would not hold everything up.
I guess whether this would be worth it or not depends on whether the advantages of "0 boarding time" from the airline's point of view offset the cost of the infrastructure and extra weight required to support such a system.
From a security point of view, you could keep the pod completely decoupled from the other parts of the aircraft (e.g. no cabin access, not "coupled into" control systems).
The article ends by saying that most airlines don't do the optimal methods of boarding in order to encourage people to upgrade to priority/early boarding, and that it makes them more money that way.
Wouldn't it make the airlines even more money to optimize boarding, which would enhance customer experience, which would increase the likelihood of them flying with you on future flights?
I'm sure some accountant somewhere has numbers that say otherwise but it's difficult to accurately measure how that small of a chance could increase brand loyalty (a major factor in Southwest's success). In my opinion, other airlines should reconsider the decision to leave boarding unoptimized.
Is that the wrong way to think about business decisions or should you always trust the predicted numbers no matter what?
This should take into consideration the time to organize the people before they enter the plane. I may have missed it, but I didn't see the research cover that.
I bet the "most efficient" method pointed is one of the less efficient methods to organize people outside.
Imagine trying to implement the Steffen proposal. Everyone has to be in exactly the right position in line for their seat. You'd essentially need to number the seats in the preflight lounge and loosely enforce seat numbers at that point.
In Europe this doesn't happen (in my limited experience). People board in random order in which they lined up towards the gate or get off the airport bus.
I think this is because americans can't ever let anybody loiter so they just have to push people into some order, even inferior one.
The article doesn't capture the fact that half of the time the boarding delay is caused by people looking for available space in the overhead bins. Even in the best workflow he demonstrated, there will still be people going back and forth to find a bin.
That Steffen method looks much more theoretical than the other ones. The problem is you will have to line everyone perfectly at the boarding gate, and I believe this is pretty much impossible (everyone wants to get in first, they're barely ok with letting other people go in front of them because even if it's faster on the whole, it's slower for that person, which is all that matters). The outside-in should be implementable, but people who travel together want to stay together, so it's going against them.
Back-to-front still seems like the easiest method for an un-ordered, mildly-cooperative group of agents.
"those who pay extra are sitting on planes longer than necessary"
Only if the passengers boarding is the thing that takes the longest (as opposed to refueling, inspections, loading luggage, getting clearance). This may very well be the case some or even all the time, but I don't know that it is.
What's interesting to me (as a very frequent traveller) is that I have routinely seen completely full 747-size planes board in 10-15 minutes in Japan. This has much to do with the culture I suspect, plus smaller size humans, and less tendancy to take bigger bags. Still, it's impressive.
[+] [-] scott_s|12 years ago|reply
I understand the impulse to get on the plane, but it's irrational if you aren't using the overhead bins. (As a rule, I do not. I always check my bag plane-side.) Getting on the plane earlier won't get you to your destination faster. So, don't stress about it, sit down and relax.
Although, my attitude could end up screwing up these optimized methods. But I don't think it hurts in the back-of-the-plane-first method.
[+] [-] MichaelGG|12 years ago|reply
Also I've found that a lot of people have an affinity for taking the better seats (last row of front cabin on a lot of United's fleet has space under the seat in addition to in front). While you can let them know and ask them to move, it makes you feel a bit like a jerk, especially if they switched seats to sit next to a companion. Or if they got "confused" and took the other side to avoid the sun and then say "oh I'm sorry, do you mind taking mine or shall I move my stuff over to the other side of the cabin"?
This doesn't seem to happen in proper First cabins.
[+] [-] dllthomas|12 years ago|reply
I disagree. Continually paying attention for an important prompt is stressful and distracting. I'd much rather be waiting on stuff I can't miss.
[+] [-] cortesoft|12 years ago|reply
Also, many people don't want to check their bags because most airlines now charge $15-25 to do so. Also, when I don't check bags, I don't have to wait in line for the baggage check at my departure, and I don't have to wait at the baggage claim when I arrive. For the short flights I take most often, this extra time can be almost as long as the flight itself.
[+] [-] abruzzi|12 years ago|reply
If I need to bring enough stuff to require check baggage however, I am always the last to board the plane.
[+] [-] leemcalilly|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] udfalkso|12 years ago|reply
It's hard to wait long enough though. They start with "final, final, final boarding calls" prematurely and you still end up waiting in line for 5-10 minutes in the gateway even if you're the very last person to check in. I'd still prefer to stand for a few minutes than spend extra time crammed into that awful seat.
[+] [-] mattm|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] blhack|12 years ago|reply
Still worth it to wait in the lounge and use the wifi instead of cramming into a tiny seat early.
[+] [-] watwut|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] egonschiele|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lifeformed|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kd0amg|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] caster_cp|12 years ago|reply
Let's conduct a thought experiment. My grandma (that has difficulty hearing) is boarding a plane. Try explaining to her, in a sensible and efficient manner that only the people at the windows should get in first.
Ok, maybe my grandma is an extreme example. But think of a first time flyer. Lots of people would be confused.
Also, as already stated, people that travel together sit side by side. Are you going to split the young couple of newly weds during boarding? Is that really sensible? Or the mother and her five kids?
The main takeaway that I get is that you should let people get in without any pre-ordering. Unless you can devise a socially acceptable way to enforce outside-in boarding, that is. I'm not.
You see, the bottom line for me is that simulations are really valuable, but not taking into account the human factors involving the business, how the people actually consume your product, you can have great ideas that work on excel and flunk marvelously on the market.
[+] [-] MAGZine|12 years ago|reply
"now boarding seats A and F."
"now boarding seats B and E"...
Seems simple enough. Priority seating would just be a box that you check off, only available to people travelling in groups. Seat these people as far back and as close to a wall as possible.
[+] [-] umeshunni|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chengiz|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brownbat|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nvw|12 years ago|reply
Print triangles for window seats, squares for middle seats, circles for aisle seats.
Print arrow up for modulo 4 numbered seats, arrow right for non-modulo 4 even numbered seats, arrow down for modulo 3 numbered seats, and arrow left for non-modulo 3 odd numbered seats.
Everyone gets two and only two easily identified symbols in addiion to their ticket number, which suffice for all of the methods outlined in the article.
[+] [-] MarkTee|12 years ago|reply
While sitting in the aisle seat, I've had passengers that were sitting beside me fall into my lap as they try to jostle their way by, just to get a place in the (stationary) line.
What's even funnier is when you see these people waiting around the baggage claim 10 minutes later.
Crowd psychology is a funny thing.
[+] [-] praptak|12 years ago|reply
Yeah, we were assholes :-)
[+] [-] citric_acid|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Joeri|12 years ago|reply
I'm always surprised how everyone rushes to stand in line the moment boarding starts. Rationally speaking they should wait until the last reasonable moment to board, because the seat in the terminal is more comfortable than the one in the airplane.
[+] [-] dailyrorschach|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sethbannon|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikestew|12 years ago|reply
Even today when you get booked flights with no carry-on room, the gate agent comes on the PA: "if you check your carry-on, we'll let you board first!" If I check my bag and don't have a carry-on anymore, and I have an assigned seat, how about I board dead last instead? Because I personally don't view being first on the plane as a reward.
[+] [-] daigoba66|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fmx|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aragot|12 years ago|reply
Hint: Don't do that.
[+] [-] monksy|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mynegation|12 years ago|reply
I can imagine that letting passengers take their seats at random results in pretty fragmented available seating so if you travel as a large group and want to seat together, this might be a problem too.
[+] [-] furyofantares|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jdcryans|12 years ago|reply
You can order by column but still let families together, for example with United you can board with your group/family's lowest group number. This means a 1K with boarding group 1 can bring in his wife and kid (who are somewhere between 3 and 5 if they don't have status) on the plane all at the same time. This way you can fill up whole rows at once.
[+] [-] carlosdp|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] samhoggnz|12 years ago|reply
In my opinion the solution would probably be to discourage as much bulk in carry on, rather than herding cats at the gate.
[+] [-] aaronbrethorst|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] anonymoushn|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vim-guru|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xyzzy123|12 years ago|reply
I guess whether this would be worth it or not depends on whether the advantages of "0 boarding time" from the airline's point of view offset the cost of the infrastructure and extra weight required to support such a system.
From a security point of view, you could keep the pod completely decoupled from the other parts of the aircraft (e.g. no cabin access, not "coupled into" control systems).
[+] [-] kumarski|12 years ago|reply
The real time suck when a plane is grounded is emptying the latrine, loading the water, refueling, doing engine checks.
The lack of major airlines and the high entry costs in the space mean that it's unlikely you'll lose travelers over user experience.
RyanAir is a prime example of this....just imho though.
[+] [-] dm2|12 years ago|reply
Wouldn't it make the airlines even more money to optimize boarding, which would enhance customer experience, which would increase the likelihood of them flying with you on future flights?
I'm sure some accountant somewhere has numbers that say otherwise but it's difficult to accurately measure how that small of a chance could increase brand loyalty (a major factor in Southwest's success). In my opinion, other airlines should reconsider the decision to leave boarding unoptimized.
Is that the wrong way to think about business decisions or should you always trust the predicted numbers no matter what?
[+] [-] goshx|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] polarix|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] guard-of-terra|12 years ago|reply
I think this is because americans can't ever let anybody loiter so they just have to push people into some order, even inferior one.
[+] [-] yeukhon|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] turbulents|12 years ago|reply
Maybe we're simulating a delayed flight then?
But if the flight's already delayed, who even cares anymore.
[+] [-] rakoo|12 years ago|reply
Back-to-front still seems like the easiest method for an un-ordered, mildly-cooperative group of agents.
[+] [-] dllthomas|12 years ago|reply
Only if the passengers boarding is the thing that takes the longest (as opposed to refueling, inspections, loading luggage, getting clearance). This may very well be the case some or even all the time, but I don't know that it is.
[+] [-] Cbasedlifeform|12 years ago|reply