# So you think that train coach seats are tight?



## dlagrua (Oct 20, 2010)

If you think that train caoch seats are tight read the article on the link below.

As if airline service hasn't declined sufficiently; a European manufacturer has develped a 'standing only seat" to help the airlines increase their profits.

http://www.examiner.com/airlines-airport-in-minneapolis/new-skyrider-seats-allows-airline-passengers-to-stand-flight

BTW, the "SKYRIDER" seat is recieving strong interest from US airline companies. Its doesn't get much sicker than this.


----------



## Ryan (Oct 20, 2010)

What exactly does this have to do with Amtrak?


----------



## Trogdor (Oct 20, 2010)

Wasn't this already discussed in the non-rail transportation forum?


----------



## jis (Oct 20, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> BTW, the "SKYRIDER" seat is recieving strong interest from US airline companies. Its doesn't get much sicker than this.


That part seems like marketing hooyie from the purveyors of this artifact. They have not bothered to name any airline, just made a vague statement, which could be based on something silly like some person employed by one airline visited a booth in some trade show where this was displayed and registered his/her name. I have seen such silliness happen in the IT world. No reason such would not happen elsewhere. We should wait for more concrete information from multiple sources before getting excited about this.


----------



## bretton88 (Oct 20, 2010)

The FAA has repeatedly said standing "seats" will never happen in the USA. This will never get legalized in the USA, and it's a quick way to go over an airplanes certified capacity, which is based on wieght, not on the number of people you can cram onto the plane. Maybe Ryanair can get away with this, but never will it happen here.


----------



## jis (Oct 20, 2010)

bretton88 said:


> The FAA has repeatedly said standing "seats" will never happen in the USA. This will never get legalized in the USA, and it's a quick way to go over an airplanes certified capacity, which is based on wieght, not on the number of people you can cram onto the plane. Maybe Ryanair can get away with this, but never will it happen here.


Actually each plane type is certified for the max number of people that they can take too based on the ability to evacuate them through limited number of exits in a given amount of time. So the limitation could be based on weight or max number of people. usually you run up against the max number of people limitation way before you run into weight limitations, specially if you are running light below the floor.

I agree that it is unlikely that FAA will ever certify such seats in the US or for airlines flying to/from US airports.


----------



## Trogdor (Oct 20, 2010)

bretton88 said:


> The FAA has repeatedly said standing "seats" will never happen in the USA. This will never get legalized in the USA, and it's a quick way to go over an airplanes certified capacity, which is based on wieght, not on the number of people you can cram onto the plane. Maybe Ryanair can get away with this, but never will it happen here.


Actually, an airplane's passenger capacity is based on the number of people that can (under theoretical conditions that are simulated) exit an airplane within 90 seconds with half the emergency exits inoperative.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Oct 20, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> So you think that train coach seats are tight?


Who said that? I wish they were a little more comfortable and laid flat, but other than that they seem fine to me, and I'm a pretty tall guy.



dlagrua said:


> Its doesn't get much sicker than this.


I can think of a dozen things sicker than this, right off the top of my head.



jis said:


> Actually each plane type is certified for the max number of people that they can take too based on the ability to evacuate them through limited number of exits in a given amount of time.


Many commercial aircraft are certified to carry _far_ more passengers than they currently fly in the US. It's also possible they could go through the emergency evacuation tests again to certify an even higher number. As for the FAA, I wouldn't be surprised if this new wave of rabidly anti-government candidates attempt to slash and burn the FAA along with every other regulatory agency they can get their hands on.


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (Oct 20, 2010)

We discussed this about a year ago... Plus I think most here agree Amtrak's coach is the most generous of any form on long haul transport.


----------



## jis (Oct 20, 2010)

Long Train Runnin said:


> We discussed this about a year ago... Plus I think most here agree Amtrak's coach is the most generous of any form on long haul transport.


Yeah, this one is sort of like "Ground Hog Day". I suppose the OP couldn't find anything else to post and had a great urge to post something :lol:

Agreed on Amtrak LD Coach seats. They are definitely the best available for that price.


----------



## dlagrua (Oct 20, 2010)

Ryan said:


> What exactly does this have to do with Amtrak?


Hey grumpy man, where's your sense of humor? Why if it keeps going like this maybe Amtrak will adopt the stand up seat. The NE corridor gets pretty crowded you know and I don't put it past them using seats like this in the future. If thwy do they will also need to ask all passengers to wear deodorant.


----------



## Ryan (Oct 20, 2010)

If I wanted to read something funny, I'd go to a forum about jokes.

Since I want to read about trains, I come here and get airline seats.

So I ask once again - what does this have to do with Amtrak?


----------



## jis (Oct 20, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> Hey grumpy man, where's your sense of humor? Why if it keeps going like this maybe Amtrak will adopt the stand up seat. The NE corridor gets pretty crowded you know and I don't put it past them using seats like this in the future. If thwy do they will also need to ask all passengers to wear deodorant.


In the spirit of humor, why would Amtrak want to spend money to get seats for the people that it intends to have more or less stand. Isn't just a strap to hold on to enough on a train, like has been for over a century?


----------



## rrdude (Oct 20, 2010)

Trogdor said:


> Wasn't this already discussed in the non-rail transportation forum?


yup


----------



## rrdude (Oct 20, 2010)

Ryan said:


> If I wanted to read something funny, I'd go to a forum about jokes.
> 
> Since I *want to read about trains*, I come here and get airline seats.
> 
> So I ask once again - what does this have to do with Amtrak?


Well Ryan, maybe you should be more careful, and not read posts that in the "non-rail transportation" forum!


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Oct 20, 2010)

rrdude said:


> Well Ryan, maybe you should be more careful, and not read posts that in the "non-rail transportation" forum!


In Ryan's defense this thread was originally posted in the Amtrak Rail Discussion subforum and then moved.


----------



## rrdude (Oct 20, 2010)

daxomni said:


> rrdude said:
> 
> 
> > Well Ryan, maybe you should be more careful, and not read posts that in the "non-rail transportation" forum!
> ...


"Sorry Ryan". **Grovels in Shame**


----------



## Ryan (Oct 20, 2010)

Thanks, Dax. I wouldn't have complained had it been put in the right place to begin with.


----------



## AlanB (Oct 21, 2010)

daxomni said:


> rrdude said:
> 
> 
> > Well Ryan, maybe you should be more careful, and not read posts that in the "non-rail transportation" forum!
> ...


Correct Dax! I moved it earlier today.


----------



## amtrakwolverine (Oct 21, 2010)

AlanB said:


> daxomni said:
> 
> 
> > rrdude said:
> ...


So you're the trouble maker


----------

