Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Beds even for economy passengers!

Don't know about you guys but I think this is a fab idea and would probably try it at least once!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=473568&in_page_id=1811

Reply 1

dh00001

im confused do the ordinary rows of seats fold into a swan and then beds or :s-smilie:

and wouldnt that increase the chance of DVT?

Reply 2

welshleprechaun

Where would they put their hand luggage?

Reply 3

isabella

I wouldn't want to be on the top Bunk. Proably isn't great if u are at all Claustrophobic.

Think i'd rather stick with the seat

Reply 4

thomasp

I saw an article about that on Flightglobal.com about 2 months ago, but I can't find it now :frown:

Apparently, Lufthansa are still only speculating about it, nothing more.

There are a few obvious things that would stand in the way of such a design. How would you evacuate the passengers from the cabin in the required 90 seconds in an emergency? You're going to get people landing on top of each other as they literally jump out of bed.

Also, there's going to be the question of are the passengers suitably restrained for landing and take-off (regulations state that passengers must be able to walk away from a 16G impact). Considering you're not allowed to use the lie-flat beds that First Class currently have during landing and take-off due to the seat belts not being designed for that type of position, they'd probably need a whole new restraining system, which would add weight and therefore cost money.

I think I'd still rather fly in a standard econo. seat though - at least you can sit upright to eat without whacking your head on another seat

Reply 5

tbm

I like the look of it, but you can guarantee there would be a really high demand for a low bunk, for example I dont think elderly/obese people would be able to climb up?

Reply 6

loopylauren

thomasp

Also, there's going to be the question of are the passengers suitably restrained for landing and take-off (regulations state that passengers must be able to walk away from a 16G impact). Considering you're not allowed to use the lie-flat beds that First Class currently have during landing and take-off due to the seat belts not being designed for that type of position, they'd probably need a whole new restraining system, which would add weight and therefore cost money.

The beds would apparently be transformed from seats after take-off

Reply 7

Lou_

I think it's a stupid idea.
I mean why do you need a bed?! Just sleep in the chair! It's not as if you're on the plane for a whole day.

Plus with beds you would get les passengers on the plane = more planes = more emissions.

Reply 8

LPK

Hmmm, that looks rather bad to me. :redface:

As much as travelling bores the hell out of me, lying down while travelling would just make me sick. :\ Not to mention i'd probably bang my head about 20 million times on the above bunk/ceiling.

Reply 9

recneps

If anything it would decrease the risk of DVT. The cause of DVT is that blood pools in the legs because of gravity. Moving the legs causes the muscles to squeeze the veins pushing blood up against gravity, so sitting still with the legs low down means the blood just pools. It then can clot.

Lying down means the legs are about level with the heart, so the blood flows freely. Just the same as when you;re in bed at night you lie down for several hours.

Reply 10

Ten Green Bottles

Where d'you put your hand luggage? I prefer BA's World Traveller Plus thanks, I can't sleep on planes (unless, by some chance, I get upgraded to Club or First) and it really doesn't appeal.

Live and let live.

Reply 11

Segat1

I'm 6' tall. I'd LOVE this to be implemented.

Reply 12

L i b

Lou_

Plus with beds you would get les passengers on the plane = more planes = more emissions.

It wouldn't be proposed if that was the case. Look at the plans: three bed stacked, probably don't take up any more room than three seats.

Anyway, who gives a **** about 'emissions'?

Reply 13

Helenia

Lou_

I think it's a stupid idea.
I mean why do you need a bed?! Just sleep in the chair! It's not as if you're on the plane for a whole day.

Erm, it's proposed for long-haul flights. So yeah, you would be on the plane the whole day (or night). I've tried to sleep on long-haul flights back from the US/Mexico, and I just can't do it. I'm only 5'9, but the space you get is still not enough for any kind of comfortable sleeping position if you're fidgety like me.

I'd be keen for it if it was safe etc. You'd be no more likely to get a DVT than if you were sleeping in your own bed (I think). The only thing making me less keen is the thought of all the extra people around me who'd use this as an excuse to join the mile high club! :puke:

Reply 14

samba

Yuck...no...they should sort out inflight broadband first!

Reply 15

FyreFight

I love it. Anyone who's been on an overnight train with convertible beds will probably agree that the extra room and privacy you get with the bed is a huge step up from the cramped seats.