Believe it or not the picture above does NOT show high density seating. It shows economy class at nine-abreast on a British Airways 777 in 2011. These seats were about 18.4 inches wide, a good 1.5 inches wider than the current generation of ten-abreast seats that BA put into their 777s nowadays. Many airlines have densified their 777s in economy class over the past decade and these new seats are tight.
Travel in such a cramped environment might not be pleasant. But the economics of how people purchase economy travel are brutal – the pain of spending money today is worse than the pain of sitting in a 16.9” wide seat in the future. Airlines simply had nothing to lose designing such packed LOPAs. Will this change post-COVID?
Nine-abreast is the optimum density for zero proximity
When a plane has nine-abreast seating every passenger can have an empty seat next to them provided that the seat factor is 66.7% or less. To see this, imagine the traditional density row:
ABC-DEF-HJK
The empty seats are B, E and J, with A, C, D, F, H and K occupied – six seats used for every three unoccupied.
Now imagine high density ten-abreast row:
ABC-DEFG-HJK
The empty seats are B, E, G and J, with A, C, D, F, H and K occupied – with six seats occupied and four blocked the zero proximity seat factor is 60%. As long as seat factor is less than 60% on a ten-abreast aircraft and less than 67% on a nine-abreast aircraft zero proximity is guaranteed. More people are likely to enjoy the extra space with traditional density because more flights have 67% seat factor or less than 60% or less.
Such a configuration is extremely wasteful if required in the long term – airlines would be burning millions of Dollars of fuel carrying around empty seats. The airlines cannot simply remove the middle seat – they are manufactured as a duo-, triple- or quad-set. If they did install seats with space between them this would still waste the aircraft’s space. I think that blocking space for social distancing is simply untenable over the long term.
But clearly traditional nine-abreast beats high density ten-abreast if an airline wants to make it more likely that people have an empty seat next to them.
What about premium economy and business class?
While a typical economy seat is between 16.9” and 18.4” wide, premium economy is significantly more spacious, with a good extra inch of width in both the cushion and the arm rest. Business beds have ample space, comfort and privacy. But while a passenger is significantly more comfortable in the plusher cabins, they are still quite close to their neighbours. Blocking seats or leaving empty space in these cabins would be even more wasteful.
Should airlines keep high density seats?
My expectation is that after the pandemic many people will continue to buy seats purely on price but some will still be willing to pay for a little extra comfort. I think that airlines should continue to offer standard economy class at either high or traditional density. But I would also like to see them making it easier for people to buy the seat next to them online – something that has always been possible with a phone call and an agent’s use of EXST in the PNR.
I do hope though that some airlines retain their 18.4” wide economy seats and that Airbus continues to promote the more spacious arrangements. Competition and choice within economy is good for the consumer – not everybody can afford a cabin upgrade. When people can travel as cheaply as possible in a high density cabin, that is a good thing. And if people who wish to pay only a few Pounds, Euros or Dollars more for extra comfort can do so too that will also be a good thing.
oliver AT ransonpricing DOT com