Emirates Planes Could Be Going Windowless (abc.net.au) 296
An anonymous reader shares a report: In the future, you could find yourself booking an Emirates flight without a real window seat. The airline has just unveiled a new first class suite on board its latest aircraft that features "virtual windows" instead of real ones. The President of Emirates, Tim Clarke, is hoping it will pave the way for removing all windows from future planes, which he says will make them lighter and faster. "What we may have [in the next 20 years] is aircraft that are, and I hate to say this to a number of passengers, windowless," he told the BBC. So there's no windows on the outside ... But Mr Clarke says on the inside there will be "a full display of windows," which will beam in the images from the outside. This will be done using fibre-optic camera technology. So, instead of being able to see directly outside, passengers will view images projected from outside the aircraft -- which is almost like the real thing.
Well that's just depressing (Score:5, Interesting)
They want to take away the ONE THING I love about flying? Seeing the world from above the clouds is beautiful and helps make the hellish experience of commercial airline travel bearable.
What the hell is wrong with these airlines?
Re: (Score:2)
If they made the window able to switch views, it might even be an improvement. Usually you can't see much - but what if the windows could show the thunderstorm raging below the aircraft or the view from the cockpit?
Re: Well that's just depressing (Score:5, Insightful)
There's nothing like seeing it directly with your eyes. Even virtual reality doesn't quite do it. Would you rather be in the cupola of the space station, or watch the views on the NASA channel?
Re: Well that's just depressing (Score:5, Funny)
watching the channel obviously. Space travel is dangerous and maims the body with radiation.
Re: (Score:3)
Plus requires a significant time investment. It's not like you can hop up to the ISS to catch a view of the Earth from the cupola and then hop back a few hours later. (The ISS orbits every 90 minutes).
No, right now visits to the ISS require months of training, a few million dollars and at least 2 weeks up there.
Can't just do it on a whim or even just take a day off work to visit.
Re: (Score:2)
There's nothing like seeing it directly with your eyes. Even virtual reality doesn't quite do it.
They could show you just what you'd see with your own eyes on a suitable display -- if it were a window instead. They really only need two outdoor cameras per passenger; and an indoor camera for tracking the viewer's viewing angle and eyeballs to adjust position and focus. At some point it Does stop becoming virtual, because you Are really there ----- you're just observing it through a different kind
Re: (Score:3)
Which is why you just make sure all the seats have displays built into them rather than making a digital window. Then each passenger can select between a myriad of views.
Re: (Score:2)
This.
I want to look out of not just the window immediately next to me. I want to be able to look out *any* window and see something reasonable. Further, if I change my viewing angle slightly, the picture should change - this is how actual, glass windows work.
Until these screens can show a different view depending on the viewing angle, I'm not interested. It won't look like a window - it will look like a screen.
Re: (Score:3)
if I change my viewing angle slightly, the picture should change
There's not a lot of parallax when moving your head at 6 miles away from whatever you're looking at. It's all just framing - and better camera positioning will do more than craning your head could ever do.
Re: (Score:3)
Nothing I see so far says that each window on one side is the same camera. And I don't think anyone says that it will look like a real window - that doesn't seem to be a goal. But worrying about slightly changing views by leaning would easily be solved by just having a wider view. Or looking at another screen since the viewing angle would be different than a real window. Or maybe an additional in-flight entertainment screen that has pan/tilt/zoom controls. Or a 360 degree VR headset that puts you float
Re: (Score:2)
There's nothing like seeing it directly with your eyes.
True, but many if not most airplane windows are so scratched up and abraded that you can't really make out much of what's out there anyway. A good video image could be an improvement, especially if they let you choose the direction of view and zoom in.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Well that's just depressing (Score:5, Funny)
The new video windows will alternate between showing old episodes of Will and Grace and a safety video about choking on airline peanuts.
First hack of this system needs to show a monster on the wing of the airplane.
Re: (Score:2)
Only when Shatner is flying
Re: (Score:2)
Does it have to be Earth? (Score:2)
I don't know. It would be awesome if I could choose what I saw. So instead of seeing the earth below a layer of clouds, how about Mars? Or stars streaking by like in Star Trek, or the center of the galaxy in the distance as we appear to traverse the Milky Way at from one spiral arm to the next?
Sign me up for that flight!
Didn't Work for London's Tube (Score:2)
They want to take away the ONE THING I love about flying?
They might want to but it is very unlikely that they will, or that it will work if they ever get as far as doing it. The London Underground used to have windowless carriages in Victorian times because, as the reasoning went, there was nothing to look at going through a tunnel all the time. Despite this, they were massively unpopular, caused motion sickness etc. and were rapidly replaced with windows. I suspect that this will turn out to be true for aeroplanes as well.
Re: (Score:2)
They want to take away the ONE THING I love about flying?
They might want to but it is very unlikely that they will, or that it will work if they ever get as far as doing it. The London Underground used to have windowless carriages in Victorian times because, as the reasoning went, there was nothing to look at going through a tunnel all the time. Despite this, they were massively unpopular, caused motion sickness etc. and were rapidly replaced with windows. I suspect that this will turn out to be true for aeroplanes as well.
LCD screens weren't very good in the Victorian days though.
Re: (Score:2)
They want to take away the ONE THING I love about flying? Seeing the world from above the clouds is beautiful and helps make the hellish experience of commercial airline travel bearable.
What the hell is wrong with these airlines?
Removing the windows makes the plane more structurally sound (maybe you heard of the Southwest fatality recently that involved a person sitting next to a window) and should improve fuel efficiency and possibly extend range. But yes, some people are going to complain bitterly about it. Do note that this is only Emirates considering this. Do you ever fly Emirates? I'm guessing you only fly within the USA. If so, don't worry. Your USA internal flying experience will only continue to degrade over time wi
Re: (Score:2)
I rarely take a windows seat (I like to pee), but I was on a plane a couple weeks ago with the high partitions between business class seats and it really becomes depressing not having any light or views. I would also worry for people with anxiety or claustrophobia. (On said flight, the "flight map" on the IFE wasn't working either, so no real sense of where you are or what is happening around you-- a little uncomfortable when you can sleep and the movies are awful.)
Re: (Score:2)
On whose screen windows they want to play to you recordings of more interesting parts of the world than the ones you would be looking at if you had real windows. /s
Re: (Score:2)
But consider the possibilities of hacking the camera feed to the virtual windows:
Re: (Score:2)
It is unfortunate that conceptually, people are simply opposed to a technology that would overall improve their experience and the speed of arrival.
There's a quick way to get airlines to adopt it in spite of any passenger objections....
There will be a "Card swipe slot", and by default the displays will all show a generic screen, until you
swipe a credit card and buy some "Outside view time"
Migrate acceptance (Score:2)
If the new displays are so awesome, then it should easy to migrate acceptance - put up the full length plane window screens along the plane, with the existing windows still in place.
Then people would get used to the screens and maybe not complain as windows go away...
That is it's a great idea, unless you are afraid to have people compare actual windows with the virtual view...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It pissed me off on my last flight to Korea on a 787, when the flight attendants hit the switch and all the windows went dark. 9 hours sitting next to a window that I can't look out of. If you people want to sleep, BUY A PAIR OF EYESHADES.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Well that's just depressing (Score:5, Insightful)
Why travel at all when you could just watch documentaries? It's less expensive, you get to see more places, and learn about the places directly from experts. The impatient can travel the world with a slideshow screensaver.
There isn't a word to describe these pretend windows. 'Inhuman' doesn't quite fit, as they only we could devise such an abomination.
More disturbing is how few people here seem to have a problem with this. Are we so disconnected from our world that an image on an LCD display is not only suitable but preferable to a window?
Something has gone seriously wrong.
Re:Well that's just depressing (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually I thought it sounded like a great idea for a house... Fewer real windows would make the house more energy efficient, reduce the places someone could enter without permission, or peep. Simulated widows could be recorded for security and include IR night vision. (I don't know if the power required to use the simulated windows would off set any saving though you wouldn't need the displays on 24-7 probably motion activated so they only ran if you where in the room)
You would want to keep some real windows for airflow and in the event of an emergency.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't live in a climate where large bay windows and sliding glass double doors are practical though I did live in a house for a while that had them. It sucked they leaked in the winter and in the summer they heated the house up like an easy bake oven. I will admit they where very nice for a month in the spring and again in the fall when it was nice out and I could open them up.
Re: (Score:3)
More disturbing is how few people here seem to have a problem with this. Are we so disconnected from our world that an image on an LCD display is not only suitable but preferable to a window?
I'm not sure about you, but I don't fly in a plane to get connected with the world. Hell when I fly long enough on the plane I disconnect altogether and go to sleep.
If you want a joy flight through the grand canyon, take a joy flight through the grand canyon. The vast majority of what you see in flying is less interesting than a picture in photoshop made of a blue gradient that suddenly changes to white.
The world is a beautiful place. You're a monster if you think you're doing it any justice from the window
Transparent Aluminum (Score:4, Funny)
Scotty gave you the formula in 1986 where is it!
Re: (Score:2)
Fancy watches have had 'transparent aluminum' crystals for 100+ years.
Re: (Score:2)
Scotty gave you the formula in 1986 where is it!
Yes, I love how he had never used the software before, and had never used a keyboard and mouse before; but he was able to type at 160 wpm and use the software to create the blueprints for transparent aluminium in seconds flat.
Re: (Score:2)
ALON is not aluminum, it's a ceramic. If you wanted a transparent ceramic, then we've had corundum for ages.
Hackers Rule The World (Score:2)
I greatly look forward to people hacking the virtual displays to show all of thew engines on fire...
I'm not going to say I'll never fly one of these, but I really, really like window seats and it would be a pretty big negative that would lead me to select other flights.
So now everyone is going to think I'm crazy... (Score:2)
when I yell that there's something on the wing.
Another interesting thought - wingless? (Score:2)
A positive aspect of non-real windows is the interesting thought that all virtual "Windows" could show views that were not obscured by the wings...
But would passengers be upset if looking outside they could not see wings on a plane?
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps... by default you get the view that a window would show.
The passenger seated nearest the window will have a set of controls that will allow them to change the view:
after swiping their credit card, or inserting a $10 bill into a bill slot to pay for 15 minutes or so of "Custom view" minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
The passenger seated nearest the window will have a set of controls that will allow them to change the view
Maybe planes should be re-configured so all passengers face the wall, and can choose either "window" or movies/TV... then they don't need screens behind the seats.
You might think that means fewer seats or seats stacked behind others - but what if you faced seats all the way around - the walls, but also the ceilings, and floors. Then you have the most expensive seats being the ceiling since you would g
well .... (Score:2)
... on the one hand, practically speaking it makes no difference. You could even get a better view, or every seat could be a "window" seat.
OTOH, paranoia ... the windows show us going to NY, but we are really going to Cuba!!
Seeing distance... (Score:2)
So now instead of being able to focus on objects near (the wings) and objects far (mountains, clouds, rivers, ocean), you get to stare at an LCD display....
Didn't some company try this a while back with windowless cars and it made people really sick?
Yammering... (Score:2)
Sounds claustrophobia and anxiety-inducing (Score:2)
Latency (Score:2)
They'll need to get the latency below the perception threshold to avoid motion sickness but it's achievable on their timeline.
Personally I'd love a cabin with no overhead storage and a 180* view of the clouds (all-cabin OLED surface) but that's an amusement park ride, not a logistically-sensible transport system.
Without windows they can have more freedom on reconfigurability which I'm sure they'd prefer.
Motion Sickness (Score:2)
No thanks (Score:2)
Motion sickness and stress relief? (Score:2)
I don't care.... (Score:2)
....just as long as I can be sure that there isn't a creature on the wing....
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Romney might never fly them again (Score:2)
selling ad space (Score:5, Insightful)
selling ad space
Re: (Score:2)
This cloud brought to you by Coca-Cola.
Re: (Score:2)
This is Emirates Airlines we're talking about. The people who charge $15,000 a ticket and give you a bed seat and an in-flight shower.
Re: (Score:2)
This is Emirates Airlines we're talking about. The people who charge $15,000 a ticket and give you a bed seat and an in-flight shower.
I'm glad Delta doesn't have in flight showers. I'm sure I'd be crammed next to some jackass taking a shower and there's no way I'm not getting sprayed in those cramped quarters.
Re: (Score:2)
<quote><p>This is Emirates Airlines we're talking about. The people who charge $15,000 a ticket and give you a bed seat and an in-flight shower.</p></quote>
<p>I'm glad Delta doesn't have in flight showers. I'm sure I'd be crammed next to some jackass taking a shower and there's no way I'm not getting sprayed in those cramped quarters.</p></quote>
If American Airlines had showers, they'd be a kitchen sink sprayer and a paper napkin, and you'd have to st
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, I've sat next to many people on American Airlines who could have benefitted from an in-flight shower. I'd sacrifice getting wet in exchange for them bathing.
Re:What about real ones for safety needs? (Score:5, Insightful)
While the Cockpit would need windows, the rest of the plane doesn't. We can still have exit doors, and most of the other things can probably be done via video feed.
Being lately we had a few issues, with Windows failing on airplanes. It is probably overall safer to not have windows.
Re:What about real ones for safety needs? (Score:5, Funny)
The cockpit doesn't need windows, it needs Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
As long as I can put the display through a filter, like HQ/2X, we'll be fine.
If there's an NES filter, even better. Then landing the plane wouldn't be any harder than Top Gun [cinemassacre.com]
Re:What about real ones for safety needs? (Score:4, Funny)
I would love if they added AR (augmented reality) options. Maybe every once in a while have dragons of UFOs flying around, or maybe a gremlin on the wing [youtube.com]
Re:What about real ones for safety needs? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:What about real ones for safety needs? (Score:5, Interesting)
And well, what happens when there's a glitch in the system and all the virtual windows go dark?
Queue the claustrophobia.....
Re: (Score:3)
This is real. Whenever I travel from Brazil to Europe shades MUST be up during takeoff and MUST be down before sunrise (flight crew check and enforce it). I don't know if it's a regulation or an internal thing from the airline. ... But then you have the planes where windows don't have shades and it's all controlled digitally, which is easier for this case.
Safe to Open Emergency Doors (Score:4, Informative)
While the Cockpit would need windows, the rest of the plane doesn't.
That's not true. One of the instructions you get in an exit row seat about opening the door in an emergency is that you need to first look through the window to make sure that it is safe to open the door. It's going to be somewhat hard to do that without a window.
Re:Safe to Open Emergency Doors (Score:5, Insightful)
A window on the exit door would have no effect on the structural integrity of the fuselage, so there would be no reason to remove it.
Re: (Score:3)
Which has nothing to do with the fact that looking through said window might be a good idea, to avoid sliding into a fire.
Pilots do not need windows (Score:3)
The fly "IFR". Instrument rules. The better ones may look out occasionally to appreciate the view. But not to fly.
Example is of that fellow that landed in the Hudson River. Did not see a huge flock of geese in good weather. What was he looking at? Computer screens.
Re:What about real ones for safety needs? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What about real ones for safety needs? (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually the rest of the plane does need windows. In an emergency, flight attendants are supposed to look through them to see whether there's anything wrong with the wings and engines (and more importantly, which one [wikipedia.org]), since the cockpit windows don't extend far enough back to allow that. Cameras are great and all, but they tend to fail in lightning strikes or when the plane has issues with electrical power.
I'm not an expert and I don't even play one on TV; however, I would suspect there needs to be a balancing act done here. Someone needs to crunch some numbers.
Will the number of lives saved by having a fuselage outweigh the number of lives lost because of every camera being taken out at the same time trying to view the engine/wing. (and all sensors failing to work too). How often are those cameras going to go out?
What I think would be a smart middle step would be to run cameras on some planes that HAVE windows and see how reliable those cameras are. Try that for a few years first. If the cameras tend to work in all conditions... Hey, maybe give windowless a go. If the cameras have problems, aren't you glad you didn't go windowless without a trial run first on a windowed plane?
There might be some advantages to cameras over windows. The lighting can be adjusted so you get better visibility in the dark. Perhaps they can detect infra-red so you can see if the engine is running hot if you doubt the temperature gauge is accurate for some reason. Heck, the pilot can look out the side of the plane himself whilst remaining in the cockpit.
Aesthetically, being in an aeroplane without windows would suck... but I'm all for them looking into whether it really is safer. Just test the camera BEFORE you remove the windows.
It's kinda important (Score:3)
> Will the number of lives saved by having a fuselage outweigh
As a passenger, I certainly feel safer if the plane still has it's fuselage.
Mainly because I'm sitting in the fuselage, I prefer it to still be attached to the plane (which is the wing and tail).
More seriously, a more efficient design actually doesn't have a fuselage. A flying wing like the B2 is more efficient, and airlines have researched using them, but passengers prefer windows and boarding is easier with a fuselage and aisle, as opposed t
Re:What about real ones for safety needs? (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually the rest of the plane does need windows. In an emergency, flight attendants are supposed to look through them to see whether there's anything wrong with the wings and engines (and more importantly, which one [wikipedia.org]), since the cockpit windows don't extend far enough back to allow that. Cameras are great and all, but they tend to fail in lightning strikes or when the plane has issues with electrical power.
A few windows might be useful for backup but the vast majority are for passenger comfort. Look at military planes. Even the ones that haul soldiers only have a handful of windows. You could easily eliminate 80%+ of the windows without affecting the visibility of the flight attendant. This would probably actually make the plane safer as windows are a common cause of depressurization. That being said, passenger comfort is kindof a big deal and screens are a poor imitation.
Re: (Score:2)
While I'm not a fan of removing the windows (I'm a private pilot - half the fun of flying is seeing the world from above), I highly doubt that the engineers designing a windowless plane wouldn't have looked at this issue and decided it wasn't really an issue or designed around it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm pretty sure pilots can tell whether engines are still attached to wings even without windows or cameras.
Re:What about real ones for safety needs? (Score:4, Funny)
I've always wondered why planes today don't have positioned cameras for the pilots to use to look at their plane
Would it kill them to put a couple of big rear-view mirrors on either side of the planes to look backwards?
I mean, really, cars have solved this since forever. /s
Re: (Score:3)
You must not be much of an engineer yourself if you don't even know how to weld one of those big '57 chevy stick-mirrors to the outside of a big 'ol metal plane.
Or at least just let the pilot roll down the window so they can stick their head out and take a look behind them. Cars have had roll-down windows for years too! Time to modernize our planes. /s /s /s /s /s /s
Re:What about real ones for safety needs? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What about real ones for safety needs? (Score:4, Interesting)
I was on a plane with a fuel leak from a fuel pump cover on the wing. Pointed it out to the flight attendant, one of the pilots walked back and looked out the window. He determined that it wasn't severe enough to be a concern, and we made a normal landing at our destination (we were only about 40 min away when this happened).
I just watched show on TV last night that had a story of a mid-flight engine failure. A passenger was recording it when over the loud speaker the pilot asked over the PA that if anyone notices any changes with that engine the they should let the flight crew know. So yeah, windows for passengers do come in handy...
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What about real ones for safety needs? (Score:4, Funny)
They will be peril-sensitive and go dark in emergencies, to reduce passenger stress levels.
Re: (Score:2)
They will be peril-sensitive and go dark in emergencies, to reduce passenger stress levels.
Why go dark? Just show a recorded normal average scene. "Everything's fine, just look out the window. No the engine did not fall off, we always fly at a 30 degree tilted angle. And notice the lovely sunrise even though it is midnight local time."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Being able to go "full manual process" in a life safety emergency is a good idea... If I do not have to depend on technology and the manual process is safer, I prefer the non-tech process...
Re: (Score:2)
The exit door will still have a window.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unlikely anything is going away due to passenger preferences and US FAA rules. In an emergency, windows are useful -- nice to know if there's any damage to the wings/engines and if there's fire/water/etc on the side you're planning to evac from. Cameras don't work without power.
Cameras don't use much power and an individual backup power supply could be provided to each camera. As long as there is also backup power in the cockpit, they can see any camera from the cockpit to judge what is safe.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The 767 and the 777, I believe, have emergency exit doors above the wings. I see no reason these doors can't keep their windows to serve this function.
I loved the 767. Plenty of room in the over head bins. You know if you need to hide body of the little snot behind you who keeps kicking your seat. Not that I did that but I did want to keep that option open.
Re: (Score:2)
What I don't get is the reference to fiber optic technology. ALL of this could have been done with 1995 technology using merely CCTV and small CCD cameras. Well, maybe. I guess we did have to wait for flatscreens due to weight considerations. But there is no need to go fiber for streaming video to what, about 300 passengers maximum?
Fiber might be useful if you were routing the actual view to each of the virtual windows but this seems like a huge expense for very little gain. If you are going to remove the windows, replacing them with hundreds of fake screens seems pointless. It's still a screen. It would be a lot cheaper to just have the screen in the seatback connected to a half dozen different angles.
Re:What about real ones for safety needs? (Score:4)
As someone who has been on more commercial flights than I care to count I'm all for removing windows. After you get above a certain altitude there really isn't anything to look at any way. I always preferred a isle seat anyway. I found it much more convenient to be able to get up and go take a piss with out having to trip over bubba on the way out.
For the record, I no longer fly commercial. I refuse to be packed into a can like a cow and have to sit that in a seat designed by a bean counter for the next few hours with the guy behind me shoes up my ass. Nope, trains are the way to go.
Re: (Score:3)
I flew London to Milan a few years ago on business and from my window I got to see the White Cliffs of Dover, the Eiffel Tower and some stunning views of the Alps. I don't think I've ever seen so much stuff out of the window.
Re: (Score:3)
I was flying on the company dime. If the cheap ass bastards could have shipped my ass baggage I'm sure they would have.
I've put so many miles in the air in the first decade of the 21 century I can clearly say that I have been to every one of the lower 48 states in the Union and most of Canada if you count flying over them. I can similarly boast to having been in almost every major city in the western hemisphere if you count running from one departure gate to the next.
Re: (Score:3)
Man, you are totally Wight.
I'm a undead monster that rises at night to suck on the souls of the living?
I know. I shouldn't correct other people gramer or spelling but I couldn't pass that one up. :)
Re: (Score:3)
Why?
1. Stronger
2. Lighter
3. Faster
4. Safer
5. Cheaper
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Came here to say that this is going to be the "HIDE TEH DECLINE!!!1" of the Flat Earther nutjobs...