Not every aerospace news story reverberates beyond the industry's usual devotees to reach the wider public. But futuristic cabin interior visions for new-generation aircraft are definitely among the themes that find broader appeal, probably because the proposals - unlike revelations about novel airframe materials or advanced engine technologies - relate directly to consumers' travel aspirations.
However, there is also not much else quite as fleeting and intangible as designers' dreams of how the hundreds of square metres on board aircraft could be filled other than with repetitive rows of, mainly, economy class seats. Be it gyms, shops and restaurants on the Airbus A380 or - three decades earlier - the jazzy Tiger Lounge in the Boeing 747's lower lobe, the majority of the most outstanding plans never made it beyond the drawing board or model-makers' studios.
No matter how far-sighted and radical the ideas are, cabin interiors have an intrinsic flaw over other parts of the aircraft - a short life. While the best airframe and engine designs have stood the test of time over 40 years or so, the average seat looks worn out after five summers and in-flight entertainment (IFE) equipment is - in today's era of fast-changing consumer electronics - usually past its sell-by-date after two years.
This discrepancy is why cabin interior design should ideally be separated from the development of new-generation aircraft, says Jörg Schuler, vice-president cabin and cargo at Airbus in Hamburg. The split ensures passenger furnishings can be updated, while the aircraft type may remain in service for decades.
Schuler is head of the "cabin cargo competence network" at the German aerospace industry association BDLI, a group of interior equipment suppliers that came together to explore how aircraft cabins might evolve in future. The key objective is to work as an integrated team at an early stage of new aircraft developments, without the individual companies being limited to their respective areas of expertise.
The designers and engineers also wanted to approach the interior from a new angle. Aircraft have traditionally been designed to fulfil structural, aerodynamic and operational requirements, with the interior ending up as a tube that is kitted out to accommodate passengers. Traveller comfort is a major criteria in determining fuselage width, but the cross-section ultimately becomes a constraint for the interior equipment over the life of the aircraft model and potential derivatives. Stefan Berndes, BDLI's head of air transport, equipment and materials, says the project group tried to think in the opposite direction - from the inside of the aircraft out to the exterior - because the cabin is where the revenue is generated.
Maximum space exploitation is a core theme for the group, given that airlines struggle with tighter profit margins and consequently want to generate more revenue per aircraft. The team devised a double-deck seat layout for narrowbodies, which would increase passenger capacity by 20-30%, with the fuselage volume being similar to today's single-aisle models, says Schuler.
The floor between the two decks would not be even, but have a step to provide standing height on both levels. The aisles on either deck would be off-set from the centre, with an asymmetric seat layout of three-seater rows on one side and much wider than usual single seats on the other. The latter could be used flexibly to accommodate, for example, an adult with a child, premium class traveller with additional space, or an overweight person. The three-seater rows are envisioned to fold up when unused and slide back and forth easily to adjust capacity to demand with different cabin configurations.
Greater flexibility is a key trend for future aircraft cabins, says Jenny Ruegamer, associate creative director at Boeing's long-standing interior design consultants Teague in Seattle. She does not expect individual items, such as seats and overhead bins, to change fundamentally, but that the cabin's overall layout and functionalities will be much more easily and quickly altered than today.
Ruegamer likens such flexibility to the introduction of LED lighting, which allowed airlines to set individual tones in their cabins without hardware changes. She expects this concept to be extended to other areas.
Overhead bins will not be possible in the double-deck layout as a result of the lower ceiling height. The engineers devised a "luggage revolver" in a passenger entry area in the middle of the fuselage, from where travellers would either step up or down to their respective seating areas. The paternoster-like system would consist of a series of mobile compartments around the inside of the fuselage, which automatically move into place for travellers to drop or pick up their hand baggage.
Accelerating and simplifying boarding and disembarkation has long been an objective for aircraft manufacturers and operators. Overhead bins have become progressively larger on new aircraft models to accommodate the trend towards more carry-on luggage. But Ruegamer questions whether the pursuit for ever more sophisticated and voluminous bin designs is a long-term solution. "If people bring on more luggage and there is no space for it, is the issue really to continually create more space or to look at why are people bringing the bags on board?"
Charging passengers to check-in baggage into the hold is an obvious driver for more carry-on luggage. But Ruegamer's team aims to look beyond individual issues to see whether today's air travel routine can be optimised as a whole, where, for example, baggage might be taken care of before passengers arrive at the airport, or they travel without any luggage at all.
Giving travellers more control of their surroundings during the journey is another major future trend. Schuler says that passengers should find similar comfort standards on board aircraft as in a hotel. Much of this is to be achieved through interactive surfaces - on sidewalls, seat backs, ceilings etc - where passengers can select items, such as lighting, fresh air supply, IFE and communication systems, through intuitive touchscreen controls, like on a tablet computer.
Schuler has no concerns that greater passenger influence will lead to a random mosaic of films, lighting effects, web pages and online games around the aircraft's interior. He thinks that occupants will not disturb each other any more than is the case today. But standardisation of the different cabin systems will be a challenge. "Manufacturing aircraft will never become classic mass production," he says. "Yet the emerging [cabin interior] technologies need to be widely applicable."
Resulting from the rapid development of consumer electronics, this is particularly the case for tablet computers and smartphones that passengers bring on board for use in conjunction with the aircraft's IFE system. The BDLI group has initiated a "fast-track innovation" project to shorten qualification and approval procedures for new equipment to respond more quickly to new market trends.
Given that the latest long-haul models of both Airbus and Boeing are just at the beginning of their service lives - and their short-haul siblings are being revamped for a career extension - it is likely that the interactive interior surfaces will appear as cabin updates rather than part of the next aircraft generation. Schuler does not deny that the touchscreen-inspired technology could be installed on, for example, the A350. "When we develop new [interior] technologies, we always take into account how they can be fitted to the existing platforms. This is generally an objective."
He adds that all of the BDLI interior group's five core areas of study - maximum space architecture, storage management, active surfaces, hygienic lavatories and connectivity clouds for aircraft - have meanwhile led to distinct research and technology projects at the respective suppliers. "Some of these technology developments will not be necessarily coupled to a new airframe structure. These are ideas which could be implemented earlier."
Source: Air Transport Intelligence news
