Maybe triple stacked with ease of entry / exit.

It’d sure be a while lot more comfy and wouldn’t need to take up any more room.

Economics, take off and landing, aircraft rotation….

Because people would shag in them.

Yeh, if you want to join the mile high club, you’ll have to stump up for private jet.

Far too much cleaning involved for a scheduled flight ;-)

Probably as close as you’ll get is Air New Zealand
https://www.airnewzealand.com/economy-skycouch

The big thing is you can’t use them for takeoff and landing so they take seat rows up and cost money. Anz are trialling them though

Probably as close as you’ll get is Air New Zealand

https://www.airnewzealand.com/economy-skycouch

Right airlines, wrong product. https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/inside-the-worlds-first-airplane-bunkbeds

Worst joke ever.

Evacuation times?

Assuming it is done cheaper, would the pod be for all 3 people in the seat row and have a single sheet for all 3?

I think they do, they’re called seats.

Many years ago I went on a dirt cheap ski holiday by coach. The big surprise was that, unlike the usual reclining seats on ski coaches, while we were on the ferry crossing the seats were converted to bunk beds. It was a very pleasant trip down the autoroute to breakfast where they were changed back to seats.

if done in economy, i imagine planes would look something like these Austrian sleeper train sets? – look horrible!

looks more like the Necropolis Express from Waterloo to Brookwood..

Theres a really interesting episode of 99PI about ‘ownership engineering’

Aircraft seats are discussed because of the issue of conflict between passengers. You want to be able to recline your own seat, but you’re annoyed if the passenger in front reclines their seat. Airlines basically sell the same bit of space twice and both passengers feel like they ‘own’ it. This is done on purpose.  If you’re annoyed at the passenger in front of or behind you then you’re not finding things to be annoyed at the airline about.

So thats the reason – you can’t double-sell sleeping pod space

Mine!

Will also be because it would mean the aircraft would need to be dedicated for long haul night time travel only. I very much expect there’s fleet adaptability issues and most people will put up with travel in a cramped upright seat if the price is right. If not they’ll pay more.

Many years ago I went on a dirt cheap ski holiday by coach

skimeribel maybe – I’ve done snowcoach.co.uk and skiweekends.co.uk but they are not bunks. skiweekends went through the tunnel, snowcoach by ferry which wasn’t as good.

99PI about ‘ownership engineering’

Interesting. I always wondered why the seats weren’t fixed. No one should be able to recline, problem solved. However that would give me the chance to moan about other issues with the flight.

Reasons why not:

1. Certification assessment.
2. Cost of installing in the first place.
3. Can’t be used for take-off and landing.
4. Need to be cleaned between passengers.
5. Loss of seats where they’re fitted.
6. Safety in turbulence?
7. Would require additional air conditioning to be fitted.
8. Weight. Modern aircraft are at their max take-off weight pretty often, so you’re leaving passengers or cargo behind if you add beds.

There are already economy sleeping pods on most planes, it’s called buying an upgrade to business class.

Already said, but there’s a conflict between ‘economy’ and ‘sleeping pod’. Want a pod? You’ll likely need a business class or higher ticket.

The pods on the planes to Philadelphia and Newark were OK back in the day. But the price was hard to justify compared with economy.

Possibly the long-haul thing is why Air NZ are getting into this space. Internal/Australia flights are max 2-3 hours to small airports.

The big flights are very long haul 12+ hours.

I read a review of the Air NZ sleep things, you only get a four hour stint. Not sure it is worth the cost?

Airlines basically sell the same bit of space twice and both passengers feel like they ‘own’ it. This is done on purpose.  If you’re annoyed at the passenger in front of or behind you then you’re not finding things to be annoyed at the airline about.

This is not the main reason.  It’s simply so they can pack more people in – that’s it.  No psychology required.  Packing more people in obviously saves money, but that subsequently makes the fares cheaper for us, AND it saves carbon, so don’t jump onto your high horse too soon.

Regarding the OP I think it would take much longer to get everyone on and off a plane if they were all lying down.

No one should be able to recline, problem solved. However that would give me the chance to moan about other issues with the flight.

Having been on planes without reclining seats, your main moan would be ‘why are these seats so **** uncomfortable?’  Why don’t you try leaving your seat upright on your next long haul flight, see how you get on?

A grumpy/pious response….but should anyone be taking up more volume/furniture weight than necessary in 2024? No matter how much they are prepared to pay. They should be pulling them out of 1st/business, not finding a way to put them in cattle class. There’s almost an argument that aircraft should be as uncomfy as possible so people on fly when then really really need to.

skimeribel maybe

No it was “Alpine Adventure Club” which was a cheap ‘n’ cheerful arm of SkiVal. Strange that the travel was more comfortable than the normal coaches on more expensive deals. The hotel was cheap ‘n’ cheerful though but great fun.