Pictures: Italian firm reveals stand-up seat concept

Italian firm Aviointeriors has revealed a high-density seating concept called Sky Rider that will no doubt prove to be right up O’Leary’s alley. The term “stand-up seat” sounds like an oxymoron so let’s call this what it is, a butt shelf. I’m sure pregnant women, anyone with small children, the elderly and the disabled will welcome this news.

Now, USA Today is reporting that the seat, to be unveiled at #AIX10, offers a whopping 23in pitch. I’ve got to see this baby next week in Long Beach!

Stand 1.JPG

Stand 2.JPG

, , ,

23 Responses to Pictures: Italian firm reveals stand-up seat concept

  1. Michael H September 10, 2010 at 8:41 am #

    Sorry, I take one look at those seats and all I can think about how painful they might be during turbulence.

    You may end up doing some painful damage to your Gentleman’s bits if sitting in one of those when the ride gets bumpy.

  2. Mary Kirby September 10, 2010 at 8:52 am #

    Thanks for pointing that out. You’re right. It doesn’t look very friendly for one’s bits. I note with interest that the seat proposes a very slim IFE monitor, so at least there is a chance we’ll be (somewhat) distracted.

  3. Max Flight September 10, 2010 at 9:15 am #

    These seats actually look kind of interesting to me, and might be OK for a short flight – if you are young but not a child, fit, and very price sentitive. But what about everyone else? You couldn’t have a single class flight with these. Is the idea that this would become an additional (sub)class of seating? For people who can’t afford a “real” seat? Hmmm.

  4. anon September 10, 2010 at 10:04 am #

    My thinking is that stand-up seats will only work once they can be quickly converted to “real” seats upon payment of the appropriate supplement at the airport (or perhaps whilst on route). The trick will be making the mechanism light enough -1st class lie flat seats can afford the extra pounds for a reclining mechanism; stand-up seats can’t.

  5. Rafael from iloveplanes September 10, 2010 at 12:38 pm #

    Is it just a coincidence that these seats are blue with yellow trim?

  6. Philip September 10, 2010 at 1:24 pm #

    In pictures I saw they have put a young lady in the seat and even she looks uncomfortable, actually She looks like she is on a hospital commode – that’s what they remind of.

    There’s an idea for O’Leary’s Ryannair – if the seats were tiny self contained commodes he could lose the lavs and squeeze more people in.

    He doesn’t read this does he? He might think I am being serious….

  7. quanterium September 10, 2010 at 1:24 pm #

    I don’t think making them convertible to normal seats, as propsed by “anon” would be an option. While it would work, it would mean that the pitch would have to be sufficient to allow the seats to move into a normal configuration, thus you lose the point of having stand up seats in the first place, which is to dramatically decrease pitch, allowing more seats. I’m sure they would be happy to sell upgrades to regular seats up until boarding time, but it would be like United’s Economy Plus: You move to a different seat when you upgrade.

    Also, airplane capacity isn’t just defined by the number of seats you can fit in a plane, but also how quickly you can evacuate it. You can only get so many people out the 8 exits on a 737-800 in 90 seconds. It’s why EasyJet has 4 overwing exits on their A319s (like the A320 has), rather than the usual 2.

  8. David Parker Brown September 10, 2010 at 2:29 pm #

    All joking aside, I bet this will happen. It might take a lot of time to get them approved, but with enough time and lobbying, I bet they will get approved. People will complain about them, until they see the price difference :) .


  9. Scott Kingery September 10, 2010 at 2:37 pm #

    Wonder how much space would be between the rows? Especially if that try is pulled down.
    Being tall, even in regular seats it is hard to see out the window if I am sitting next to it. I would never be able to see out if I was standing up.

  10. Jetcal1 September 10, 2010 at 2:54 pm #

    Surely Aviointeriors must be congratulated on being so responsive to the market.
    It was only a few weeks ago that Mr. O’Leary made his proposal, and now thanks to the miracle of CGI, we have a proposal.

    Think of how many companies wish they could respond so quickly.

  11. Dave September 10, 2010 at 3:22 pm #

    Personally, I think the person or persons who came up with this concept needs to have someone kick them repeatedly in the ‘nads around the clock for a week. That’ll motivate the other design firms to be less stupid. Also, O’Leary needs to have someone kick him in the nuts repeatedly, not only might he be behind this, but because he is a tool.

  12. Oussama September 10, 2010 at 4:54 pm #

    At the end of the day the number of passengers that can be transported in any aircraft is what is in the Type Data Certificate based on the ability to evacuate the aircraft in 90 seconds.

  13. 2Phast4Rocket September 10, 2010 at 7:37 pm #

    I actually like this idea if I end up paying less for a plane ticket. Works great for short vacations and the like.

  14. CJL September 10, 2010 at 10:36 pm #

    Ah, now this could work, but there are a few obstacles in the way of success (success would be reducing the cost of the flight).

    1) Reducing the pitch means more seats per overhead bin.

    2) Most “cheap” airlines charge for check in luggage, so people are going to try to pack as much into carry-on as they can.

    3) Airlines wiill then charge per weight of carry-on, probably negating any reduced fare for the stand-up seat.

    Result, individuals pay the same for the flights that he use now, but stand!! Clever. :)

    If these are used like bus routes (day tripping), then I think it would. For example, a route with high density where people would like to “commute”: London-Paris, Paris-Milan, Tokyo-Sapporo (world’s busiest route), etc.

    Can’t be used for tourist routes, as the pricing outlined above wouldn’t seem to make sense.

  15. alloycowboy September 12, 2010 at 5:30 am #

    There also another very serious critical flaw with this seat design.

  16. rgbdtw September 13, 2010 at 6:32 am #

    do you really think the airlines would lower prices……………lol thats funny

  17. 7K7 September 13, 2010 at 7:40 am #

    More leg and hip injuries during turbulance or accidents.

    Cases of varicose veins.

    Major evacuation hazard, trying to squeeze out of very thin spaces.

    The elderly, the large, the infirm, and children can forget flying. In fact only a those in a small range of butt-to-ground size range will fit in these.

    What the world needs now is a freak meteor strike on a specific place in Italy.

  18. EYKD September 13, 2010 at 9:11 am #

    7K7, you pointed everything out very well.

    I wonder to know how they are going to certify the seat for 16g forward and 14g downward test. I’d say it is a very tough task unless you install multi-point seat belts, like those found on the racing cars.

    Ah, yes, back seat tray table and IFE monitor look especially humiliating here.

    But. Besides all of that aircraft interiors will be changing sooner or later. Maybe this is just a first step? So flying will never be the same we know it?

  19. Jack Pratt September 17, 2010 at 8:16 am #

    Might work if seats are facing rearwards. Can’t wait to try on my next trip DFW-HKG. Maybe next will be stripped frozen pax in stacks? That would make the An-225 a 3000pax airliner with one pilot maybe and 2 loadmasters–zero flight attendents. Ryan would love! Jack

  20. Mat September 29, 2010 at 11:57 am #

    Found on on the same topic

    Testing Tiny Airplane Seats
    The key is that the Skyrider seats are saddle-shaped and pitched slightly forward, so that the knees of long-legged people start to fit under the seat in front of them. .

  21. MacMarcus October 6, 2010 at 2:58 am #

    I think that there will be the possibility for another Koito-like affair here (if the seats will get certified), and I guess EASA will watch out carefully about certification of this torture “seats”. Besides the material used on the primary structure and the structure design itself, all I can say is that the STS (stud-to-stud) distance is very limited, and the total C.G. (pax + seat) is too high: this combination of factors will induce tremendous interface loads on rear fittings, even with a quad-stud, making the dynamic certification quite a challenge. One more point is that DOT 382.21 (accessibility to 50% per class of the aisle seat for disable people) can’t be granted: these cannot be sold to any US airline. I have been on many Ryanair and Easyjet flights, both 737′s and A320′s, and sitting on no recline HD seats is a pain in the neck even for flights of 1.5 hrs duration: just imagine how painful it can be sitting on these “things”. Great move on marketing, indeed.

  22. Chibale November 13, 2010 at 5:30 pm #

    haha this is soo true!!!! Thas hilarious.

  23. Jalen November 13, 2010 at 7:03 pm #

    My Lord, What have I gotten myself into? LOL!!

Leave a Reply