I'd love to know what the feedback was from the mockup display. I can't recall seeing any publically released data and it would surprise me if it was positive. I hate longitudinal seating as much as I hate fixed seating, unless I'm travelling in the forward position. Call me old fashioned and a pleb, but that's my choice and I'm sure there are a lot of others out there like me. You give the customer what they want or suffer the consequencies and I shouldn't have to spell that out.tonyp wrote:They have had a full-size mockup on public display so no doubt they got plenty of feedback from that. I don't think armrests achive anything and would reduce the flexility of the seats (e.g. people with small kids etc).Transtopic wrote: On the question of the fixed seating, I wonder if they also canvassed the public's opinion on the longitudinal seating for the new metro trains. In all of the government's initial publicity, the trains had a mix of transverse and longitudinal seats, but without any further consultation, that morphed into the all longitudinal model. They could at least have dividing armrests, which is common in some other jurisdictions.
On the matter of armrests for longitudinal seating, they would at least make it bearable by avoiding sliding sideways into your neighbouring passenger because of the rapid acceleration and deceleration of the metro trains. The only positive outcome would be that it would give your glutes and thighs a good workout.