https://ir.gentex.com/news-releases/new ... ft-windows

Announced today at CES 2020, Gentex Corporation announced Airbus will now offer dimmable windows on their aircraft.

The updated windows darken twice as fast and become 100 times darker, effectively eliminating more than 99.999% of visible light.

Would be interesting to see which aircraft this goes on...

Ishrion wrote:

and become 100 times darker, effectively eliminating more than 99.999% of visible light.

Nice... though it's gonna suck on those airlines where the crew uses a mother-switch to just override everyone's window and make the cabin dark as throughout the flight.

LAX772LR wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

and become 100 times darker, effectively eliminating more than 99.999% of visible light.

Nice... though it's gonna suck on those airlines where the crew uses a mother-switch to just override everyone's window and make the cabin dark as throughout the flight.

the 787 has that feature and I hear it's not all that popular, though with some individual tweaks it could be.

It is horrible (at least the way Boeing has installed it on the 787). My five cents.

Worst innovation since IFE boxes under the seat in front of you. I hate that centralized master dimming feature.

strfyr51 wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

and become 100 times darker, effectively eliminating more than 99.999% of visible light.

Nice... though it's gonna suck on those airlines where the crew uses a mother-switch to just override everyone's window and make the cabin dark as throughout the flight.

the 787 has that feature and I hear it's not all that popular, though with some individual tweaks it could be.

This website is about the only place they are even up for debate. Out in the real world, they almost universally disliked.

I love the dimmable windows on the 787. It’s a great compromise between being able to see outside and being respectful to those in the cabin who want to sleep. You can still see outside pretty decently, and the seat mates get to sleep. Better than the alternative which would be the crew asking everyone to have their window shades shut completely preventing someone from being able to see out the window.

Noshow wrote:

Worst innovation since IFE boxes under the seat in front of you. I hate that centralized master dimming feature.

Are cabin attendants "locking" them dark? Every 787 flight I've been on, I've been able to lighten the window after the master switch has darkened them all.

Tokyo777 wrote:

Noshow wrote:

Worst innovation since IFE boxes under the seat in front of you. I hate that centralized master dimming feature.

Are cabin attendants "locking" them dark? Every 787 flight I've been on, I've been able to lighten the window after the master switch has darkened them all.

American Airlines FAs are locking them on long-haul flights.

Tokyo777 wrote:

Noshow wrote:

Worst innovation since IFE boxes under the seat in front of you. I hate that centralized master dimming feature.

Are cabin attendants "locking" them dark? Every 787 flight I've been on, I've been able to lighten the window after the master switch has darkened them all.

Yes. It allows us as cabin crew to control the entire cabin environment. The night flight it’s fine, obviously. It’s the day flights, were the sun is beaming in, that you’ll see the crew take over the window controls.

Colonia wrote:

It is horrible (at least the way Boeing has installed it on the 787). My five cents.

What?
How's that the way it's installed on the 787? (I'm shocked)


There have been several changes to these dimmable windows on the 787 Dreamliner and GENTEX has been selected by Boeing on the 777X long before !!!


"The 777X program will be the first to utilize Gentex’s latest EDW technology, capable of eliminating more than 99.999% of the visible light at twice the darkening speed of previous windows. The 777X system will be designed with centralized control, allowing flight crew to set specific lighting scenarios for day or nighttime flight without reaching over passengers to open or close the mechanical shades.

“We’re proud to be a continued partner with Boeing as we look to expand and improve our dimmable glass product offerings. With careful design and collaboration with Boeing, our teams have developed a robust EDW system that easily integrates to the airframe for optimal control, aesthetics, performance, and reliability,” said Steve Downing, Gentex president and chief executive officer... "


https://ir.gentex.com/news-releases/new ... le-windows

jeffh747 wrote:

I love the dimmable windows on the 787. It’s a great compromise between being able to see outside and being respectful to those in the cabin who want to sleep. You can still see outside pretty decently, and the seat mates get to sleep. Better than the alternative which would be the crew asking everyone to have their window shades shut completely preventing someone from being able to see out the window.

It is not a great compromise at all. You can barely see the landscape when it's dimmmed at the maximum. 50% dimmed, maybe.
A great compromise would be airlines giving eyeshades to pax who want to sleep.
I will happily buy eyeshades to my fellow seat mate if he wants to sleep. But if a dimmable window makes me miss the Himalaya or the Altaïr mountain in a magic light, like during my last HKG-AMS, I will loudly complain during the whole flight (and after).

I never understood why some people think it's ok to bother your neighboor with your reading light or your screen, watching a blockbuster, while watching outside is an offense?? And I am not talking of 5h nonstop with direct sunlight right into the cabin. When the light is strong there are ways to watch carefully.

Very bad idea from Airbus. Not having these hateful things was one of their selling points.

sergegva wrote:

jeffh747 wrote:

I never understood why some people think it's ok to bother your neighboor with your reading light or your screen, watching a blockbuster, while watching outside is an offense?? And I am not talking of 5h nonstop with direct sunlight right into the cabin. When the light is strong there are ways to watch carefully.

Couldn't agree more! A very good reason to avoid 787's, unfortunately, as I like this aircraft much more than the competing Airbuses.

workhorse wrote:

Very bad idea from Airbus. Not having these hateful things was one of their selling points.

How many Airbus planes have you bought on the basis the windows aren’t dimmable?

Has any airline ever purchased any plane on the basis the windows are, or aren’t, dimmable?

There's no words in the English language or any language for that matter to describe how much I hate this terrible gimmick! What's the point of paying for a window seat if you have no control over your window?! I refuse to fly on the 787 because of the stupid dimming windows. I'm beyond disappointed!

Colonia wrote:

It is horrible (at least the way Boeing has installed it on the 787). My five cents.

What makes it so horrible is the crew override feature, a friend of mine missed out on seeing the stunning glaciers of Greenland and the Northern Lights 'cause the crew dimmed and locked all the windows.

scbriml wrote:

workhorse wrote:

Very bad idea from Airbus. Not having these hateful things was one of their selling points.

How many Airbus planes have you bought on the basis the windows aren’t dimmable?

Has any airline ever purchased any plane on the basis the windows are, or aren’t, dimmable?

I haven't bought any but I have, ever since the 787 entered service, avoided booking long haul flights on it. An airline that does not have any 787, other things being equal, will always have my preference since there is no risk of ending up on a 787.

L0VE2FLY wrote:

There's no words in the English language or any language for that matter to describe how much I hate this stupid awful feature! What's the point of paying for a window seat if you have no control over your window?! I refuse to fly on the 787 because of the stupid dimming windows. I'm beyond disappointed!

Colonia wrote:

It is horrible (at least the way Boeing has installed it on the 787). My five cents.

What makes it so horrible is the crew override feature, a friend of mine missed out on seeing the stunning glaciers of Greenland and the Northern Lights 'cause the crew dimmed and locked all the windows.

Not only the override feature. Dimmable windows make it impossible to open just the lower part of the shade to get a good view of the landscape while minimizing disturbance to other passengers.

I fly Hainan from China from time to time on their 787s. In December coming into LAX from China was the first time that the windows were locked in the dimmed position for the entire flight. It didn't bother me much as I wanted to sleep, but we landed with the windows dimmed at about 5pm.

Is this not a violation to landing procedures? (return your seat to the upright position, stow your table tray and open your window)

I asked the FA on exit and she just assured me that they controlled the windows with the master switch. She didn't seem to be aware that the windows needed to be open for landing.

Only A.netters would get their knickers in a knot over airplane windows that dim without their consent because how dare anyone take away their god given right to look through them at the expense of everyone else's rest...


Fortunately, no one else gives much of a damn.

I know that I’m one of the few but I welcome the option.
No more fighting about the question if the shade have to up or down.
Let the FA control the windows.

It's one of the things I treasure on a 787. Just of an AC 788 and it's great. Darkened windows allow me to still see outside vs. those mechanical shades, not to mention the inevitable one that doesn't stay up.

Francoflier wrote:

Only A.netters would get their knickers in a knot over airplane windows that dim without their consent because how dare anyone take away their god given right to look through them at the expense of everyone else's rest...

It is not our god given right. Our god given right is to not book with airlines who buy airplanes with this "feature".

Francoflier wrote:

Only A.netters would get their knickers in a knot over airplane windows that dim without their consent because how dare anyone take away their god given right to look through them at the expense of everyone else's rest...


Fortunately, no one else gives much of a damn.

Only a.netters would get their knickers in a knot over people who want to look out of windows. Their need to sleep without shades robs other passengers of the enjoyment of the flight.

Francoflier wrote:

Only A.netters would get their knickers in a knot over airplane windows that dim without their consent because how dare anyone take away their god given right to look through them at the expense of everyone else's rest...


Fortunately, no one else gives much of a damn.

No one else gives much of a damn because we live in a world full of nervous fliers and idiots who are too scared or too stupid to enjoy the most beautiful thing about flying.

workhorse wrote:

Francoflier wrote:

Only A.netters would get their knickers in a knot over airplane windows that dim without their consent because how dare anyone take away their god given right to look through them at the expense of everyone else's rest...

It is not our god given right. Our god given right is to not book with airlines who buy airplanes with this "feature".

You are right. By all means, do.
Airlines don't seem overly worried, however, which would lend credence to the fact that this is a pet peeve only shared among a few enthusiasts.

mjoelnir wrote:

Francoflier wrote:

Only A.netters would get their knickers in a knot over airplane windows that dim without their consent because how dare anyone take away their god given right to look through them at the expense of everyone else's rest...


Fortunately, no one else gives much of a damn.

Only a.netters would get their knickers in a knot over people who want to look out of windows. Their need to sleep without shades robs other passengers of the enjoyment of the flight.

Less than 25% of passengers have access to a window. Less than 100% of these have any interest in looking out. That leaves a vast majority who would rather relax in the dark. Additionally, it only takes one inconsiderate person to raise his or her shade to flood the compartment with bright light and wake up or inconvenience an entire cabin worth of passengers trying to sleep.

It's only a combination of simple math and basic decency, but don't let me stop your tantrum.

As a passenger it's okay to think about the comfort of the fellow travelers. So sitting next to a window I am ready to not disturb other people with bright sunlight or similar when I move "my" shade up to look outside. This is why I select my window seat not only for scenery but for time of the day and flight direction to be "on the dark side" (i.e. north) in order not to disturb anybody.

But having considered and done all this before I don't want to be disturbed afterwards myself by centrally dimmed windows (or blinds that are all to be closed by FA announcement) please. Window seats are not wall seats. If people want to sleep during a dayflight they should wear a mask to have it dark.

Francoflier wrote:

workhorse wrote:

Francoflier wrote:

Only A.netters would get their knickers in a knot over airplane windows that dim without their consent because how dare anyone take away their god given right to look through them at the expense of everyone else's rest...

It is not our god given right. Our god given right is to not book with airlines who buy airplanes with this "feature".

You are right. By all means, do.
Airlines don't seem overly worried, however, which would lend credence to the fact that this is a pet peeve only shared among a few enthusiasts.

mjoelnir wrote:

Francoflier wrote:

Only A.netters would get their knickers in a knot over airplane windows that dim without their consent because how dare anyone take away their god given right to look through them at the expense of everyone else's rest...


Fortunately, no one else gives much of a damn.

Only a.netters would get their knickers in a knot over people who want to look out of windows. Their need to sleep without shades robs other passengers of the enjoyment of the flight.

Less than 25% of passengers have access to a window. Less than 100% of these have any interest in looking out. That leaves a vast majority who would rather relax in the dark. Additionally, it only takes one inconsiderate person to raise his or her shade to flood the compartment with bright light and wake up or inconvenience an entire cabin worth of passengers trying to sleep.

It's only a combination of simple math and basic decency, but don't let me stop your tantrum.

If the words I was writing are indicative of a tantrum, than you should take up locking in a mirror.

Apart from that, not everybody wants to live in a darkened cave, some people enjoy a view.

Now I am not a BA fanboy by any means as they do a lot wrong, but one thing I do love is that on transatlantic daytime flights, by and large about 20% of the shades remain up, meaning there's a nice ambient daylight to move about but dim enough for the majority to sleep if happy. My one westbound on United out of LHR an announcement was made for shades down on a B772 and the cabin was 100% darkened, night fell, at 11am. That screwed my body clock, and was most unpleasant.

If direct sunlight is on someone else's face or IFE then that's a question to be amicably resolved among adults, the pressing need to darken the cabin is really to cut down the workload of the cabin crew. Why do I need to sit in pitch black in the middle of the day? I think it's a cultural thing, Europeans tend to look out of the window more, there's a bigger variety of scenery than the continental US so I guess this feeds into Americans on long haul.

But on the overwhelming number of flights I am on, sun doesn't stream in the windows, it's too high in the sky. This argument is swinging from one extreme to the other sadly.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the way the dimmable windows work on the 787. There may be some airlines who set-it up in a terrible way, but on the flights I have been on 787's (most of those were with Ana), after all windows went dark, I was always able to change again up to 50% (not more indeed, it was blocked at that maximum value).
At least I could still comfortably see outside without disturbing the sleep of other passengers. If you open your shade on a normal plane, even slightly, it's not nice at all for the others and you will quickly be asked to close it anyway by an attendant or by neighbors.
The only think I don't like so much about them is how warm those Windows become on the sunny side of the plane.

It is being offered but not as standard like on the 787. So, it will be interesting to see which airlines take up this option vs. standard pull-down shades.

Personally, I'm not against the technology itself and is very good. My only gripe is loss of control over my window view when FAs lock down the controls., which is the reason why I still prefer the pull-down shades. I still do my best to minimise any disturbance to others around, by only looking out for a few moments, having the shade open only a 1/4 of the way or covering the back of my head with something like the pillow.

If it was the case where I can still control the dimming amount myself, clear to dark for limited times, I would totally be on board with it. Even better if it was possible to develop the technology further so a smaller patch can be made 100% visible.

trad01 wrote:

I fly Hainan from China from time to time on their 787s. In December coming into LAX from China was the first time that the windows were locked in the dimmed position for the entire flight. It didn't bother me much as I wanted to sleep, but we landed with the windows dimmed at about 5pm.

Is this not a violation to landing procedures? (return your seat to the upright position, stow your table tray and open your window)

I asked the FA on exit and she just assured me that they controlled the windows with the master switch. She didn't seem to be aware that the windows needed to be open for landing.

What happens if the system is broken and the windows remain dimmed for landing?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3010 using Tapatalk

DarkSnowyNight wrote:

strfyr51 wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Nice... though it's gonna suck on those airlines where the crew uses a mother-switch to just override everyone's window and make the cabin dark as throughout the flight.

the 787 has that feature and I hear it's not all that popular, though with some individual tweaks it could be.

This website is about the only place they are even up for debate. Out in the real world, they almost universally disliked.

Every person I've talked to about them loves them. So do I. They're awesome.

The glaciers of Greenland are an amazing site when the light is right. When I first got to experience them the captain came on the radio to advice us of the opportunity and banked the aircraft a little to give us a better view and encouraged the sharing of the view with our fellow passengers who were not sitting directly at the window. Or alternatively you can sit in perpetual darkness, its up to you.

LAX772LR wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

and become 100 times darker, effectively eliminating more than 99.999% of visible light.

Nice... though it's gonna suck on those airlines where the crew uses a mother-switch to just override everyone's window and make the cabin dark as throughout the flight.

Good because sleep is spoiled too much by that one passenger that opens his window flooding the cabin with light.

CobaltScar wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

and become 100 times darker, effectively eliminating more than 99.999% of visible light.

Nice... though it's gonna suck on those airlines where the crew uses a mother-switch to just override everyone's window and make the cabin dark as throughout the flight.

Good because sleep is spoiled too much by that one passenger that opens his window flooding the cabin with light.

Buy a face mask/shade then. If you so want it closed, choose a window seat.

CobaltScar wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

and become 100 times darker, effectively eliminating more than 99.999% of visible light.

Nice... though it's gonna suck on those airlines where the crew uses a mother-switch to just override everyone's window and make the cabin dark as throughout the flight.

Good because sleep is spoiled too much by that one passenger that opens his window flooding the cabin with light.

All that sunlight tends to melt snowflakes....buy an eye mask or use the free ones they give out...

Ferd

trad01 wrote:

trad01 wrote:

I fly Hainan from China from time to time on their 787s. In December coming into LAX from China was the first time that the windows were locked in the dimmed position for the entire flight. It didn't bother me much as I wanted to sleep, but we landed with the windows dimmed at about 5pm.

Is this not a violation to landing procedures? (return your seat to the upright position, stow your table tray and open your window)

I asked the FA on exit and she just assured me that they controlled the windows with the master switch. She didn't seem to be aware that the windows needed to be open for landing.

What happens if the system is broken and the windows remain dimmed for landing?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3010 using Tapatalk

I've flown on AA, UA, AS, WN, DL and the crew allowed window shades to be closed during take off and landing. So the US is exempt in following the procedures.

CobaltScar wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

and become 100 times darker, effectively eliminating more than 99.999% of visible light.

Nice... though it's gonna suck on those airlines where the crew uses a mother-switch to just override everyone's window and make the cabin dark as throughout the flight.

Good because sleep is spoiled too much by that one passenger that opens his window flooding the cabin with light.

I think this thread illustrates perfectly the value of the dimmable windows, which I'm actually very happy to have. Everybody has a different expectation, and only the dimmable windows can create some level of mutual agreement, which is their value. The vast majority of 787s I've flown on have allowed me to 'undim' the windows after they've all been dimmed, and the end result is that I get to see out without really disturbing others. This simply isn't feasible with a standard slider, which usually blinds both myself and those around me when I open it.

As well, these windows are a much better experience from the crew's perspective. They often have to reach over and behind hardware and across passengers (or disturb the pax) to close the windows, and I've experienced plenty of brand new planes where a significant amount of jerky force is required to move the shades. Sometimes open windows are even behind seat hardware (in Business or First) and really a struggle to get at. Dimmable windows remove all of the struggle, labour, and effort crew/pax have to put out just to get the things closed and open during flights.

I really hope lots of airlines opt for these with Airbus and the 77X.

Better scenario than the 787, at least it's not compulsory. Best of both worlds, let airlines pick whether they want to or not.

gatibosgru wrote:

CobaltScar wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Nice... though it's gonna suck on those airlines where the crew uses a mother-switch to just override everyone's window and make the cabin dark as throughout the flight.

Good because sleep is spoiled too much by that one passenger that opens his window flooding the cabin with light.

Buy a face mask/shade then. If you so want it closed, choose a window seat.

newsflash: the crew want these things dimmed on most flights too.

EChid wrote:

The vast majority of 787s I've flown on have allowed me to 'undim' the windows after they've all been dimmed, and the end result is that I get to see out without really disturbing others. This simply isn't feasible with a standard slider, which usually blinds both myself and those around me when I open it.

Here's my problem with the "undimming". You're doing it for the whole window. With the pull-down shade, I can open just about enough for me to have a peek outside without having to blast the cabin with a window-full of sunshine. And besides, it is usually just a problem when the sun is directly shining on the window side.

I'd agree with the ease of use for the cabin crew however.

sergegva wrote:

jeffh747 wrote:

I love the dimmable windows on the 787. It’s a great compromise between being able to see outside and being respectful to those in the cabin who want to sleep. You can still see outside pretty decently, and the seat mates get to sleep. Better than the alternative which would be the crew asking everyone to have their window shades shut completely preventing someone from being able to see out the window.

It is not a great compromise at all. You can barely see the landscape when it's dimmmed at the maximum. 50% dimmed, maybe.
A great compromise would be airlines giving eyeshades to pax who want to sleep.
I will happily buy eyeshades to my fellow seat mate if he wants to sleep. But if a dimmable window makes me miss the Himalaya or the Altaïr mountain in a magic light, like during my last HKG-AMS, I will loudly complain during the whole flight (and after).

I never understood why some people think it's ok to bother your neighboor with your reading light or your screen, watching a blockbuster, while watching outside is an offense?? And I am not talking of 5h nonstop with direct sunlight right into the cabin. When the light is strong there are ways to watch carefully.

You can definitely see a lot more than with conventional window shades. I've flown on the Dreamliner several times and dimmed the windows completely and still could see outside very clearly. Yes it's not ideal compared to having it fully opened but it's better than selfishly blinding your seat mates who may have forgotten their sleeping mask. If I'm flying during the day on an A330 then yes in that instance I wouldn't want to miss the views so I would have the window open, but it's a lot more comfortable to have the option to dim them than not.

skipness1E wrote:

there's a bigger variety of scenery than the continental US so I guess this feeds into Americans on long haul.

I beg to differ here. There is a lot more geographic diversity in the 3 largest North American countries than there is in most of Europe. You can go from and arctic climate to a highland climate to a Mediterranean climate to a continental climate to a tropical or sub tropical climate with all sorts of variations all in the same counties. You can find rock formations that look like something on mars just a few hours away from a desolate desert just a few hours away from wine country which is just a few hours away from much greener and wetter coastal forests which often are up against coastal mountain ranges and volcanoes. The only part of the continent that doesn’t have much scenery is central Canada and US. Otherwise it is a lot more geographically diverse than Europe. Even at that, there’s also cloud formations to look at which are equally as interesting.

I like to keep my window open, but if you sit by the wing it can be blinding as it acts as a reflecting surface for all that sunlight. You can’t just close the top where the sun is but you have to close everything. They can forcefully dim the windows, but if it doesn’t have that feature, won’t they just come and make you close your shade?

CobaltScar wrote:

newsflash: the crew want these things dimmed on most flights too.

Darken the cabin- up the temperature- more pax go to sleep = less work for the FA's.

CobaltScar wrote:

gatibosgru wrote:

CobaltScar wrote:

Good because sleep is spoiled too much by that one passenger that opens his window flooding the cabin with light.

Buy a face mask/shade then. If you so want it closed, choose a window seat.

newsflash: the crew want these things dimmed on most flights too.

You mentioned sleep being spoiled as your reason, so that's why I replied with what I did. Whether the crew wants it or not is irrelevant to one's opinion.

CobaltScar wrote:

gatibosgru wrote:

CobaltScar wrote:

Good because sleep is spoiled too much by that one passenger that opens his window flooding the cabin with light.

Buy a face mask/shade then. If you so want it closed, choose a window seat.

newsflash: the crew want these things dimmed on most flights too.

The crew is there to serve passengers, not the other way around. It's disturbing how often some need reminding of this.

Your ticket entitles you to get from A to B, not for a scenic flight staring outside disrupting everyone else.
Hire your own scenic flight if you want to impress your Instagram friends.

Tartarus wrote:

Your ticket entitles you to get from A to B, not for a scenic flight staring outside disrupting everyone else.
Hire your own scenic flight if you want to impress your Instagram friends.

Doesn't that work both ways though? You want uninterrupted sleep than find alternatives? Who is disrupting whom, the person who wants to look outside and can't or the person who wants to sleep and can't? As far as I'm concerned though, if I paid to select my seat (which is the case on most airlines nowadays) then I should be able to control my window in a reasonable way.

trad01 wrote:

I fly Hainan from China from time to time on their 787s. In December coming into LAX from China was the first time that the windows were locked in the dimmed position for the entire flight. It didn't bother me much as I wanted to sleep, but we landed with the windows dimmed at about 5pm.

Is this not a violation to landing procedures? (return your seat to the upright position, stow your table tray and open your window)

I asked the FA on exit and she just assured me that they controlled the windows with the master switch. She didn't seem to be aware that the windows needed to be open for landing.

My airline there is no such policy, the windows don’t have to be open for landing. Some airlines do this, but at mine we do not. The only thing is, before boarding the windows need to be uniformed, which means they’re either all open or all closed. We can take off and land with every single window closed. It makes no difference.