Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Possible Seating Arrangements For 737RS  
User currently offline1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6431 posts, RR: 2
Posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2414 times:

This thread is to discuss the possible seating arrangements for the 737RS.

There have been many discussions on the different possible seating arrangements for the 737RS/Y1. Some want a wider narrowbody, while others want a stubby widebody.

Possible seating arrangements:

3-3: This is the standard seating arrangements for most narrowbodies. However, many Airbus fans brag about how the A320 is wider than the 737. Some Boeing supporters want the 737RS to be wider than the A320, but still retain 3-3 seating. A 1.5/2x width aisle has been suggested.

2-2-2: This seating arrangement has been rumored, and was going to be the seating arrangement for the now cancelled 7J7. Some claim that this seating arrangement would be the best choice. If this seating arrangement is used, the 737RS can carry single-file LD3s.

2-3-2: I do believe that this is what the Boeing patent is going for. This is as wide as a 767, and is able to carry side-by-side LD2s.

2-3: There are some people who prefer the 2-3 seating arrangement of the MD-80/MD-90/717. However, if this seating arrangement is used, cargo is likely to be restricted.

3-4: No aircraft has ever used a 3-4 seating arrangement. Can the 737RS be the first?

Any thoughts on this?


The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBG777300ER From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2005, 256 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2396 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter):
3-4: No aircraft has ever used a 3-4 seating arrangement. Can the 737RS be the first?

Theres a reason no aircraft has used this configuration, its just not practical for passenger comfort.



Koi mi sra v gashtite?
User currently offlineA319XFW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2375 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter):
2-3-2: I do believe that this is what the Boeing patent is going for. This is as wide as a 767, and is able to carry side-by-side LD2s.

How would the moments be like on the tail - this would give a really short aircraft and you'd need a huge tail for the moment arm (a la A318 compared to the A319)?

And how are aerodynamics for a short and wide aircraft? Wouldn't the relatively large cross-section increase the drag?

Just some questions I'm throwing out, as I don't know the answers myself!


User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2339 times:

A 2-2-2 has my vote. Passenger appeal would be huge, especially when mated to the 787 style interior.

However, for the sake of airline revenue, I'll bet it's a 2-3-2 setup.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineBdl2dca From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2247 times:

Quoting BG777300ER (Reply 1):
Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter):
3-4: No aircraft has ever used a 3-4 seating arrangement. Can the 737RS be the first?

Theres a reason no aircraft has used this configuration, its just not practical for passenger comfort.

Not to mention illegal. No seat can be more than 2 away from the aisle.

I think the highest likelihood is 3--3 with an extra wide aisle, rather than 2-2-2.



146,319,320,321,333,343,722,732,733,734,735,73G,738,744,752,762,763,772,ARJ,BE1,CRJ,D9S,D10,DH8,ERJ,E70,F100,S80
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30547 posts, RR: 84
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2225 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I agree 3+3 with a very wide (24" or greater) aisle makes the most sense.

If you can kill the bottleneck in the aisle, you can load and unload faster because people will be able to get around the ones standing to put stuff in the overhead or those who bring aboard their own bodyweight in carryons can maneuver their trolley down the aisle easier.  Wink

The next thing Boeing needs to do is make very deep and tall overhead bins that can take up to a 25" deep and 18" tall rollaboard nose or wheels-in. That way, even the "super-sized" rollaboards people bring aboard can fit nose/wheel-in and people don't have to waste time and block the aisles hunting for overhead space. They will also be able to put smaller bags/coats on top of their main bag, leaving the seat underneath open which helps in comfort in short-pitch configs.

Two aisles helps, but they still bottleneck, and if you have to make them smaller (to the regulatory minimums) to keep the fuselage width manageable, you risk increasing the chances of a bottleneck because people can't maneuver.


User currently offlineJohnny From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2206 times:

hmmm, i remember at least one a/c with 3-4 config.i think it was here on a.net. But i am not really sure if it was a Trident or VC10.

Any ideas?  Smile


User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2191 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter):
2-3-2: I do believe that this is what the Boeing patent is going for. This is as wide as a 767, and is able to carry side-by-side LD2s.

Too wide.

2-2-2

18.25" seats with 19.75" Aisle. Double-Bubble and a T-Tail.

More like an RJ/727 than a DC-9.


User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2717 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 2085 times:

I have suggested two fuselage width. One 5 abreast for 75-150 seating and one 7 abreast for 150-250 seating. This combined with different wing options but width the exact same architecture and cockpit commonality would make the most suitable option in my opinion. And both the 5 and 7 abreast planes would offer better comfort than a 3+3 seat option. No one tend to agree with my opinion in this regard.


Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineMidway2AirTran From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 864 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2041 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter):
3-4: No aircraft has ever used a 3-4 seating arrangement.

Man, if this were the case, I'd better stop asking for a window seat!!

2-2-2 or 2-3-2 would work, dual aisles would be of benefit IMO.



"Life is short, but your delay in ATL is not."
User currently offlineSR100 From UK - England, joined Dec 2005, 109 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1988 times:

Quoting Johnny (Reply 6):
i remember at least one a/c with 3-4 config.i think it was here on a.net. But i am not really sure if it was a Trident or VC10.

Channel Airways used to fly two Trident 1Es in a 4-3 abreast configuration.

There were seven rows of seven abreast seating in the forward cabin between doors 1L and 2L. The aft cabin had the regular six abreast cabin. Channel Airways managed to squeeze 139 passengers into the Trident 1E. When BEA took over one of the two Tridents from Channel Airways - the other went to BKS - they reduced the cabin configuration to 123 seats in a tourist class configuration. BEA's same size Trident 1C had a two class layout with 80 seats, the regular single class layout was 93 - with some rows of aft facing seats...



My favourite planes flown: Lockheed 188 Electra, Tridents, VC-10, B-707, L-1011, A330, E90 + Concorde
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Seating Arrangements For A330 posted Sat Jun 29 2002 17:27:54 by DC-10 Levo
Seating Chart For PIA 777 posted Thu Nov 16 2006 01:40:32 by PIA777
So Boeing Is Just Waiting For An Engine For 737RS? posted Fri Sep 1 2006 20:29:04 by Lehpron
Possible International Service For BDL posted Wed Nov 9 2005 01:09:38 by Flytweed
Possible New CRJ For QX posted Sat Sep 17 2005 03:38:38 by Cessna172RG
Air France Loss - Seating Arrangements posted Wed Aug 3 2005 12:29:35 by Timmytour
Seating Assignments For BA.... posted Fri Apr 15 2005 15:14:01 by KhenleyDIA
A Possible New Solution For RG posted Fri Jan 7 2005 11:07:45 by EMB195ER
Possible New Destinations For RAM? posted Thu Dec 30 2004 00:43:55 by Bambicruz
Possible Embraer 170 For CO/COEX posted Tue Apr 27 2004 23:32:16 by Corey07850