Errors and Omissions

Standing-room only on plane trips: a bad idea

If you saw last Tuesday's Times, the front-page article on Airbus' proposal of "standing-room" seating as a way to cram more people onto airplanes was really weird and fun, showing how twisted corporations can be when trying to serve their customers. It turns out, at least according to Airbus, to be incorrect. See below:

A front-page article last Tuesday about seating options that airlines are considering to accommodate more passengers in economy class referred incorrectly to the concept of carrying passengers standing up with harnesses holding them in position. During preparation of the article, The Times's questions to one aircraft manufacturer, Airbus, were imprecise. The company now says that while it researched that idea in 2003, it has since abandoned it. The article also misstated the capacity of the Airbus A380 superjumbo jet. The airliner can accommodate 853 passengers in regular seats; standing-room positions would not be needed. (Go to Article)


Now, reading this correction, it's not at all clear whether the reporter's imprecise questions were the problem, or whether an avalanche of negative PR caused Airbus to run away from this idea. You decide.

Travel
Newspapers
Corrections
airbus
new york times

posted by Unknown @ 5/02/2006 09:11:00 AM