Designing Better Transportation — Lessons From Planes and Trains
There are two major forms of mass-transport in the world and they could not be more different in terms of design considerations and resulting user experience. Planes have been designed with minimizing space-per-customer, weight-per-customer, and allowable-movement-per-customer as primary goals. Engineering and profit goals for the airplane owner have supremely trumped the basic human comfort of airplane passengers. In contrast to this, trains and ferries, while having similar profit motives, have prioritized comfort for passengers, increased communal space, and made exercise a reasonable option. They have also been designed for efficient entry and exit methods.
So why have airlines been designed to be so non-user-centered? The answer is that airlines have had little reason to prioritize customer satisfaction, and the FAA hasn’t put in place regulations that require humane design and actively restricts airlines from improving some practices. All of the airline competitors have to operate within the same regulations and the same airports, so an open market where an airline could truly differentiate itself based on customer experience isn’t a possibility. However, what if the FAA actually cared about airline passenger comfort, or if airlines could operate outside of traditional airports? What would a user-centered air travel experience look like? The following sections explore some of the possibilities.
PLANES
Design Summary:
Planes are designed to be one line after another. You wait in line to have baggage processed. Another line to get through security. Another line to wait to get on the plane. You sit in a line of other tightly cramped seats. You wait in line to get off the plane. You wait in line to get your checked luggage, and you wait in line to clear customs. Planes themselves are optimized around cramming as many people in the smallest amount of space possible, to increase cost-effectiveness for the airline, who is paying for the fuel. This results in insufficient baggage space, insufficient leg room, and long flights that violate any doctor’s advice on how often you should get up and stretch your legs. It’s surprising that airlines haven’t been sued for unhealthy travel environments, because that is certainly what they are providing. While factors such as customer safety and ergonomics have certainly been considered by Boeing human factors experts, customer happiness, comfort, and emotional well-being are certainly not be weighed heavily in the design process, as evidenced by the resulting designs.
Reimagining a Plane:
Air travel does not have to be a horrible experience. Yes, new technologies and government guidelines would be needed, but the main challenge would be to convince plane manufacturers and airlines that there is a market for a more enjoyable flight experience. It is quite possible that a slower transport option (think along the lines of a floating cruise ship dirigible) might be preferred by many travelers. Even if we stay with the basic plane/petrol concept, automated security checks that happen rapidly enough to not create lines would help. Creating planes with no center aisle, where passengers enter or depart their seat directly through the side of the plane could help. Leaving room for a circular aisle where passengers could walk in a circle to stretch their legs would make flights more healthy. Reserving one storage compartment per-person would help avoid the fight for available storage. Simply creating planes that hold less passengers in a given space would help provide the equivalent room of a first-class seat for all passengers. In contradiction to this, airlines are in fact purposefully repositioning their seating arrangements to fit more seats on planes which reduces the available space per person.
Planes in Australia load through both the forward and rear doors simultaneously resulting in ½ the necessary loading and exit time. Planes should also learn from the successes of trains and ferries, namely that they should have a bar and lounge area where people can relax, walk around, and socialize. Some planes have this, but it is deemed a “first class experience” and only provided to part of the plane at premium prices, instead of being democratized and made available to the entire plane as would occur on a train or ferry. When a transportation design can only offer a humane experience to a small subset of wealthy passengers, it is a bad design. *
TRAINS
Design Summary:
Trains can either be a slow or fast form of travel depending on where you are, however all of them share quite a few positive traits. Trains usually have assigned seats and have more than enough storage space for what you carry on. Sometimes they have some security concerns, as baggage can be stored in a separate area from the owner. Train seats almost always recline and have some kind of foot rest option. Train seats use up far more space per-person than airline seats and they correspondingly offer greater comfort and relaxation. Most trains permit walking between cars and many of them have a sleeping car, lounge car, dining car, and snack bar. While train travelers have been known to complain, it is typically complaints of boredom, or not being able to afford the sleeping car. This stands in opposition to airline complaints which tend to cover sore legs, claustrophobia, lack of exercise, poor air, and general unhappiness.
What would a better train look like?:
Generally trains offer a fairly good user experience. Removing the ticket line and having electronic payment and verification would make it easier to get on the train. Notifying passengers in advance about which train car to enter helps to distribute the initial boarding line along the track at the station. Some trains could use better security for possessions. One option would be a storage trunk per person in the bottom of the car, with a RFID bracelet given to each rider to unlock the trunk. Possessions would be stored when you boarded. The main aisle on a train could be made wider which would allow passengers to pass each other easily. Every car could come with an upper observation deck to allow for more open space and relaxation. I don’t cover ferries in detail on this post, but they are in many ways better than trains and planes in that they have far more room for people to freely move and baggage is often locked in cars on a lower level.
ALTERNATIVES
There are a number of innovative transport options being discussed which would offer more humane designs.
Hyperloop: The Hyperloop offers a unique transport option which would safely speed passengers between LA and San Francisco in just over a half hour. Given the speed and short duration of the journey it might make more sense to have isolated pods which offer high personal security and comfort, while supporting rapid entry and exit to avoid loading and unloading delays that hold up the train from departing. Notice the wide doors and simultaneous access to all seats on one side, unlike an airplane. It could also be that underground tunnels for hyperloops might make more sense that air travel in the future if you can put the tunnels under oceans. It’s easier and cheaper to get power to locations that aren’t airborne.
Tesla Self-Driving Electric Bus: Busses are not analyzed here because they offer most of the design deficiencies of an airplane plus numerous other downsides. However, An automated, electric, bus which was designed to support rapid entry and exit, with more isolated personal space might offer significant advantages. It has been discussed that the Model-X falcon wing doors could be used in a repeating fashion down the outside of a stretch limo Model-X. This would allow for separate compartments inside, the removal of the center aisle, and opening individual pod doors for specific passengers.
Straddling Bus: China has invented a bus which glides over the top of existing traffic, solving the issue of public transit being delayed by rush-hour traffic. It also has an interior more reminiscent of a ferry and would allow passengers to walk around while being transported as well as having a few out over the top of traffic. **
GENERAL TRANSPORTATION DESIGN GUIDELINES
Every form of transport should be designed to support the following guidelines for humane human transport:
- Support exercise and free movement — Passengers should be either to get up and move around easily if the trip is more than a half-hour. An alternative (e.g. for automobiles) is to have frequent rest stops available for pausing transport.
- Support socialization — Passengers should have a place to congregate and chat if they wish.
- Support entertainment — Passengers should either have something changing to look at (either natural or digital)
- Support lying down — For longer trips, fully reclining seats or beds are a necessity
- Minimize lines — Lines are not needed when ordering processes are digital and boarding processes are properly designed
- Support individualized and secure baggage storage — Baggage can be expensive and no one wants unknown items placed in their baggage. If you can reserve a seat, then you can reserve storage.
- Support digital reservations — No one likes to run for the best seat. Require people to choose seats in advance.
* Feasibility and cost are not considered in this article. However, examples such as Tesla prove that things that were considered infeasible, too expensive, and without a clear product-market fit, can become a reality if there is a vision to produce a better experience for the customer. (Aug 25, 2016)
** The straddling bus appears to be in a concept phase and may not get off the ground due to design limitations and political issues. (Aug 25, 2016)
Originally published at www.uxoftravel.com.
