SRO in the Plane!?

Could it be true that some airlines are planning standing rather than sitting on "short flights?" The airlines have been working hard to fit, ok, squeeze, more and more passengers on their airplanes. As the seat manufacturers make "slimmer" seats, instead of giving us more leg room and walking space, the airlines are trying to add more passengers.

Business-wise, of course, they're right, but what about if they get sued, because it's too difficult and crowded for passengers to walk around during the flight, and then the passengers suffer thrombosis in their legs, which is potentially fatal?

This past year I ended up flying from Israel to NY, and back, three times. The aisles were full of people trying to keep their blood moving. The seats were so packed that one couldn't do any of the "sitting exercises." I always request aisle seats, so I don't have to inconvenience, wake up and disturb, anyone to get out and move.

No place in the article does it discuss whether standing, strapped to the padded boards being designed, will be even worse for blood circulation than sitting. If I'm not mistaken, standing is much more dangerous.

If the airlines want to save money, they can eliminate or charge for their "entertainment." Years ago we had to pay for the earphones, but then they were of better quality and more comfortable. During my recent flights, there was nothing worth listening to, and the mini-screen was the wrong distance from my middle-aged eyes. It was too far to be seen comfortably with my reading glasses on and too small to be seen clearly without.

If you want comfort when flying, the best is to try to get on an unpopular flight, and then you can stretch out on empty seats.