Boarding front and back

Once upon a time, we always climbed steps to board an aircraft. We often still do, when an aircraft is on a remote stand, or at an airport with few or no airbridges, or when we are flying with an airline that is not prepared to pay for its flights to link to the airbridge (that’s you Mr O’Leary….). When there are only steps, than it is logical for them to be available fore and aft.

However, I was surprised, when boarding an SAS flight at CPH last week, to hear that passengers in the rear part of the aircraft were asked to take the steps downs from the airbridge, walk across the apron, and then climb the steps to the rear aircraft door.

Now, climbing steps is good for our health, but not when you don’t feel like climbing them. At the end of a long day with a heavy bag, no thank you, I want to walk along the more-or-less level airbridge, into the aircraft, and walk to my seat. If I wanted to run up and down stairs to get to my seat, I might have chosen a different carrier.

The excuse is that it speeds boarding, and thus speeds turnaround times. That falls a little flat when the plane is fully boarded, and then held on stand for 20 minutes waiting for a slot.

The flight attendant told me it is now “normal practice”. I replied that in more than 100 sectors in the last 12 months, I had never before met a request for passengers to shimmy down the steps from the airbridge and run up the steps to the rear door. Do forum members believe, with that flight attendant, that this is the “new normal”?

BA frequently do this at Glasgow at well. It generally does speed things up – the 20 minute wait is out of the hands of the airline and with the flight boarded and ready, there is always a chance that the flight can get away sooner. If you do have heavy baggage and are sitting in the rear seats, you can always wait and go forward.

Fascinating, Canuck, and I like the idea of the long airbridge/jetway to the rear door. These are expensive items, and it woud be interesting to know about the calculation about cost – someone must have worked out that the saving in getting passengers on board quickly justified the cost of the extra airbridge.

Hi David
I’d suggest that the double airbtidges came about because the 2 stakeholders involved have a customer focused ethos. As a result a collaborative solution that both parties are happy with is much easier to agree on.
Add into the mix,that my endearing memory of Richmond is rain,rain and more rain….. So it’s also a practical solution. And apparently quicker than using steps.

Yep done this several times in South Africa, particularly at Cape Town.