Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Trident- Stye- Seating For 320 And 737?  
User currently offlineTy134A From Austria, joined Apr 2008, 193 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 7807 times:

After recently reading the thread about the Trident, I asked myself about the possibility of similar cabin layouts on modern planes such as the A320 and the 737. I know that the Trident had seats against the flight direction and in the case of Channel Airlines they had partially 4+3 seating.

I think that maybe at the emergency exits 2 rows facing each other may be of an advantage when evacuating the plane, and if all the rows face to the emergency exits, it might reduce confusion. But on the other hand I don’t know what it’s like flying like this, if it is comfortable or not, and of course would there be a gain of space on the aircraft?

The other thing I was thinking of was the 4+3 on a narrow body. It is out of doubt that this existed, but I wonder how much space was on the aircraft, and considering the cabin with of a TRD, which is a few cm smaller then the one of a 737 or 320, it could be done on a modern plane as well. Now I know that there is only a certain number of pax allowed on a plane due to certification, but I’m just asking. And as a side note: how come this was allowed on the TRD?

I read that the seats in the 4+3 configuration were actually 6 normal ones and a small one for children, but from the pics I’ve found in the internet, I can only see that they are the same.

So, any thoughts and info appreciated. Maybe there is a member in the forum that actually flew on one of the Channel Air TRDs…


flown on:TU3,TU5,IL8,IL6,ILW,IL9,I14,A40,YK4,YK2,AN4,A26,A28,A81,L11,D1C,M11,AB4,313,342,345,703,722,732,741,74L,J31,F50
26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5943 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 7790 times:

I don't believe that 4-3 is a legal configuration currently. My understanding is that the regs state that any occupant can be no further that two seats away from an aisle. Being so far away from an aisle would diminish your chances of successfully leaving the aircraft in an emergency, if you're in the window seat and the three people between you and the aisle are dead.

That's my understanding, anyway.


User currently offlineAirvan00 From Australia, joined Oct 2008, 758 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 7767 times:

I have a vague recollection of travelling in a RAF aircraft in the 1960's (probably a VC10) where all the seats faced the rear of the aircraft. Something to do with improving survivability, as aircraft don't back into obstacles.

User currently offlineRutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 3038 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks ago) and read 7662 times:

Airvan00

Quote:
I have a vague recollection of travelling in a RAF aircraft in the 1960's (probably a VC10) where all the seats faced the rear of the aircraft. Something to do with improving survivability, as aircraft don't back into obstacles.

Quite correct the RAF VC10s do indeed have rear facing seats.

Some years ago I flew on an Air Bristol BAC1-11-500 to Lisbon sitting in a rear facing seat mid plane and It was not pleasant !


User currently offlineAcabgd From Serbia, joined Jul 2005, 666 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 7444 times:



Quoting Ty134A (Thread starter):
But on the other hand I don’t know what it’s like flying like this, if it is comfortable or not



Quoting Rutankrd (Reply 3):
Some years ago I flew on an Air Bristol BAC1-11-500 to Lisbon sitting in a rear facing seat mid plane and It was not pleasant !

I flew on a BA Trident with rear facing seats and it was not unpleasant at all. Different, yes, but not unpleasant.



CSud,D9,MD8x,D10,Trid,BAC1,A30,31,319,320,321,33,346,B71,72,73,74,75,76,77,L10,S20,A42,A72,T13,T15,F50,F70,F100,B146
User currently offlineDavidByrne From New Zealand, joined Sep 2007, 1669 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 7414 times:



Quoting Rutankrd (Reply 3):
Some years ago I flew on an Air Bristol BAC1-11-500 to Lisbon sitting in a rear facing seat mid plane and It was not pleasant !

Yes, I travelled in a Dan-Air BAC 1-11 and there were rear-facing seats at the emergency exit rows (two rows, if I recall?), which makes a lot of sense. WIth a forward and a rear-facing seat at the emergency row, you've heaps of room to get out in a hurry. Only problem was that my rear-facing row and the forward-facing row in front of it didn't recline, and so you had to sit upright the whole flight. Not at all comfortable, even on a shortish LGW-Stuttgart flight. And as for facing backwards . . . hmmmm . . . I have the same negative reaction on a train. There's something psychologically disturbing about it for me.



This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
User currently offlineBCAL From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 3384 posts, RR: 15
Reply 6, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 7324 times:

Some of BA Club World's seats are rear-facing. In any event rear-facing seats are statistically safer in the event of a forced landing.

I flew on the rear-facing seats on Trident many times. Nothing noticeably unusual other than the facts that on take-off you could feel your seatbelts holding you in, and most passengers preferred not to sit in rear-facing seats so the chances of getting an empty row and/or window seat were always better.



MOL on SRB's latest attack at BA: "It's like a little Chihuahua barking at a dying Labrador. Nobody cares."
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4409 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 7200 times:

The Caravelle also had rear facing seats. Nothing strange about it, just unusual.

User currently offlineIAD51FL From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 354 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7140 times:

WN used to have the rear facing seats in their 732's maybe even in the early 733's

Chris



Enjoying the view of KIAH approach end of 27. 29.9758015, -95.2695694
User currently offlineKhobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7116 times:



Quoting Ty134A (Thread starter):
I know that the Trident had seats against the flight direction and in the case of Channel Airlines they had partially 4+3 seating.

I've flown on Tridents many times and I'm still having trouble imagining 4+3 seating. I don't dispute the configuration, but what width would the seats have been? The standard BA seats in a 3+3 arrangement were adequate, and I was much smaller back then.

So what size seats/aisle would be used for 4+3?


User currently offlineCricket From India, joined Aug 2005, 2972 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7112 times:



Quoting BCAL (Reply 6):
Some of BA Club World's seats are rear-facing. In any event rear-facing seats are statistically safer in the event of a forced landing.

Isn't that the concept with the 'herringbone' layout?



A300B2/B4/6R, A313, A319/320/321, A333, A343, A388, 737-2/3/4/7/8/9, 747-3/4, 772/2E/2L/3, E170/190, F70, CR2/7, 146-3,
User currently offlineTonystan From Ireland, joined Jan 2006, 1447 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 6934 times:



Quoting Cricket (Reply 10):
Isn't that the concept with the 'herringbone' layout?

Well the herringbone that are onboard the likes of Virgin, ANZ, Cathay, Jet, AC, DL etc are angled forwards so in theory are not as safe as rear facing seats. However I believe in practice the seats are very well structured so that in the event of an impact the passenger will not suffer the same sort of injuries as perhaps possible in a forward facing seat.



My views are my own and do not reflect any other person or organisation.
User currently offlineBabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 6890 times:

Rear facing rows in the exit would also involve 2 rows that can't recline. The one in front and the rear facing seats themselves.

If I'm not mistaken isn't it the case now where only the row in front of the emergency exit can't recline?

I'm not a fan of looking at people sitting opposite me, as would happen with rear facing seats a la BAc 1-11 and Trident..


User currently offlineSWABrian From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 299 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 6862 times:

Yes, Southwest did have rear facing seating on our 737-200s, -300s, and -500s. At about the time we were due to receive the 737-700, The FAA certification standards changed to require cabin seats be capable of withstanding a 16-g force upon impact. (Prior to this point, the rating was for 9-g.) There were no rear-facing seats on the market that could meet this new safety requirement, so the 737-700 had all forward-facing seating. We retrofitted the rest of our existing fleet with the newer higher-impact seating, except for the 737-200s which were our last aircraft with rear facing lounge seating.

User currently offlineBohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2748 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 6808 times:

At one time, rear facing seats were common on some airlines. These are the ones I recall:

Western Airlines - The first row in F were rear facing on some B720's.
Aloha Airlines - Rear facing seats at the exit row on the 737 around 1970.
PSA - The 727's had rear facing seats not only at the overwing exits, but also at the rear doors. Not only that, there was a partition in front of the rear facing seats that broke up the seating arrangements into mini-cabins.


User currently offlineBCAL From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 3384 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 6749 times:



Quoting Khobar (Reply 9):
I'm still having trouble imagining 4+3 seating. I don't dispute the configuration, but what width would the seats have been?

If the "Search" function was working (it seems to be down at the moment) I would post the thread that covered the seating configuration on Channel Airways' Trident 1Es in detail, including pictures and seat pitch, which I vaguely recall was 27.5ins. However, you will find a seating layout and picture here (Scroll down the page a little). Note that there were no arm rests between the four seats on the right.

Basically the 7-abreast seating layout was only in the forward cabin, where the aisle was much narrower, in fact too narrow for the meal/drinks trolley to be used (but that was not a problem for Channel Airways as they did not have any full or hot meal service on their flights). It was only used for high configuration short-haul charter flights - the longest being STN - LPA. Four adults could not fit comfortably on the 4-seats, so these were always given to families with children.

When the search function is restored, enter Seating arrangements on Channel Airways' Tridents which IIRC was the title to the thread, or use the username Orion737 who started the thread.



MOL on SRB's latest attack at BA: "It's like a little Chihuahua barking at a dying Labrador. Nobody cares."
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15828 posts, RR: 27
Reply 16, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 6721 times:



Quoting Rutankrd (Reply 3):
Quite correct the RAF VC10s do indeed have rear facing seats.

I think that rear facing seats are mostly standard on military transports. Supposedly they are safer in crashes.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineKhobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 6632 times:



Quoting BCAL (Reply 15):
If the "Search" function was working (it seems to be down at the moment) I would post the thread that covered the seating configuration on Channel Airways' Trident 1Es in detail, including pictures and seat pitch, which I vaguely recall was 27.5ins. However, you will find a seating layout and picture here (Scroll down the page a little). Note that there were no arm rests between the four seats on the right.

Many thanks!

One thing I noticed - the seating layout drawing shows the 3 in the 3+4 cabin being the same as the rest of the plane, yet the photo clearly shows these seats to be different. I presume the seats are actually the same as the 4 across the aisle?

In any case, I appreciate the link to that website - brings back memories.


User currently offlineBCAL From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 3384 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 6564 times:



Quoting BCAL (Reply 15):
seat pitch, which I vaguely recall was 27.5ins

Correction. I have just found a reference in the book "Trident: A History" by Dr Frank McKim

Quote:
The 1E-140 variant (used by Channel Airways) had its gross weight increased to 135,580lb and had more powerful Spey 511 engines, each with a thrust of 11,400lb. Its passenger accommodation was increased to up to 139 at a 31-in pitch. The larger capacity was made possible by having a seven-abreast seat layout with a single-aisle arrangement in the forward cabin. The seats were also of a new design, making the higher capacity possible.
The seating on the forward cabin had a gangway separating three seats on one side from four seats on the other. This seating was popular with the 'average' family of two adults and two children, who could sit together for the comparatively short flight to a European holiday destination."



Quoting Khobar (Reply 17):
the seating layout drawing shows the 3 in the 3+4 cabin being the same as the rest of the plane, yet the photo clearly shows these seats to be different. I presume the seats are actually the same as the 4 across the aisle?

Correct, but IIRC the 3 seats had armrests between them, whereas the 4 seats only had armrests at the ends.



MOL on SRB's latest attack at BA: "It's like a little Chihuahua barking at a dying Labrador. Nobody cares."
User currently offlineTristarSteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 4064 posts, RR: 33
Reply 19, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6474 times:

The BEA Vanguards also had rear facing seats.
My second trip abroad in 1969 was to Gibraltar and Tangier. We flew from Tangier to GIB on Sun morning on the Gibair DC3, I remember standing behind the pilots on the approach! (The four of us were the only pax)
Then Sun evening we boarded a BEA Vanguard for the overnight flight to LHR. We had the first two rows of seats on the right hand side, They were in a club layout with a proper solid table between them (First class was down the back). So we spent all night drinking beer and playing cards!


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25978 posts, RR: 22
Reply 20, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 6395 times:

Not sure why people seem to have a problem with rear-facing seats. They are very common on trains. In Europe, half the seats on most trains are usually rear-facing. However I still think that most people prefer to sit facing in the direction of travel and that's probably true on aircraft also.

Quoting Khobar (Reply 9):
Quoting Ty134A (Thread starter):
I know that the Trident had seats against the flight direction and in the case of Channel Airlines they had partially 4+3 seating.

I've flown on Tridents many times and I'm still having trouble imagining 4+3 seating. I don't dispute the configuration, but what width would the seats have been? The standard BA seats in a 3+3 arrangement were adequate, and I was much smaller back then.

So what size seats/aisle would be used for 4+3?

That must have been horribly cramped. The Trident cabin is only 2.5 in. wider than the BAe146/Avro RJ cabin which is very cramped and uncomfortable at 6-abreast (but very spacious at 5-abreast as operated by LX and SN).

Quoting Babybus (Reply 12):
Rear facing rows in the exit would also involve 2 rows that can't recline. The one in front and the rear facing seats themselves.

There would be no need for any seats that don't recline if the rear-facing row was in front of the exit and the forward-facing row behind the exit. Southwest used to have such a configuration on 737s (on one side only). They also had rear-facing seats in the first row and 3 rear-facing seats in a small lounge area at the rear.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Justin Cederholm
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © James Richard Covington



User currently offlineDrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5209 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 6318 times:



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 20):
Southwest used to have such a configuration on 737s (on one side only).

They were bilateral - when I was young I used to love sitting in this lounge area.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineNWADC9 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4898 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6231 times:



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 20):
Not sure why people seem to have a problem with rear-facing seats. They are very common on trains. In Europe, half the seats on most trains are usually rear-facing. However I still think that most people prefer to sit facing in the direction of travel and that's probably true on aircraft also.

Probably. I flew in a G-IV sitting forward, backward, and sideways, and either way it was fun ('course just flying in a G-IV is total fun any way you slice it  Wink )



Flying an aeroplane with only a single propeller to keep you in the air. Can you imagine that? -Capt. Picard
User currently offlineBraniff747SP From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 3013 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5619 times:

didnt SWA have the trident style seats?


The 747 will always be the TRUE queen of the skies!
User currently offlineFalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6162 posts, RR: 29
Reply 24, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5161 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting IAD51FL (Reply 8):
WN used to have the rear facing seats in their 732's maybe even in the early 733's

I have only flown WN a few times, but I recall flying on a 733 out of DTW, in 2000, in a rear facing seat. It was a club style seat, with the two rows facing each other. I choose the rear facing seat because it was the only rear facing seat I ever sat in on a plane.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 20):
They also had rear-facing seats in the first row

That is where I sat. Great for drinking beers with friends.



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
25 Post contains images Viscount630 : This was the Channel Airways 3-4 config, in the forward cabin of their Trident 1E-140s. Fine for families with children, which is what they were aime
26 Post contains links BCAL : The Search function has been restored. Here is a link to the thread Channel Airways' Trident 1Es
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...
A-320 And B-737 Replacement posted Tue May 10 2005 23:42:44 by KC135TopBoom
Praise For Southwest And Open Seating Policy! posted Thu Jul 20 2006 23:14:27 by AY104
Fuel Burn For The A318, 737, And E190 posted Sat Jan 15 2005 21:25:46 by Skymileman
Real Truth For The 717 And 737? posted Thu Jul 29 2004 05:37:56 by Sllevin
Delta Also Has Orders For 737-600 And 737-700? posted Fri Dec 29 2000 02:10:03 by L'Espace18
GE Capital Confirms Order For Boeing 777 And 737 posted Thu Oct 5 2000 05:51:17 by Boeing747-400
Would 767 Winglets Be Good For Am And MX? posted Thu Mar 26 2009 09:32:32 by AM744
Hainan Airlines To Apply For DUS And HNL posted Tue Mar 10 2009 16:34:45 by B742
Any New Service Plans For AS And/or QX? posted Tue Mar 10 2009 13:50:15 by Wedgetail737
AVL Courting UA For ORD, And NW/DL Changes posted Fri Jan 16 2009 21:05:40 by PSU.DTW.SCE