Airplane
Toilet Trends
Are the airlines providing more or fewer
toilets?
|
|
The classic Qantas 707-138 had one of the best ever coach
class toilet/seat ratios.
Ah, for the good old days.
|
We wrote a popular piece last week about
how many restrooms should an airplane have (the answer being at least one
for every 40 seats on longer flights, although fewer can be acceptable for short
flights where few passengers are likely to need to use the toilets).
This caused some follow up comments and questions, and so
here now is a sequel, as
it were, whereby we try to establish what we've always suspected to be a trend
towards fewer and fewer toilets (and more and more seats) on planes over the
years.
Please read on for some introductory comments and analysis, and
then a detailed table of toilet/seat ratios.
A Collection of Airplane Toilet
Facts and Figures
Here are some facts and figures on planes, both current and historic, to show
how these ratios have varied over the years. There's no real science to
the airlines and planes I've selected to feature - they are merely ones I could
get reliable certain information about.
Note that the table of airplane configurations that follows,
below, is more or less ordered by the year the configuration data
relates to.
If you have information on other
plane configurations and can provide me links to seat maps to confirm the
configurations, I'll be pleased to add them, too.
Early Planes Not Applicable
You'll note that we don't bother showing data for very early planes. The
earliest planes didn't need toilets on board because they could only fly for an
hour or two at a time before needing to refuel.
It was only when planes became capable of extended flight that it became
relevant to consider adding toilets, and of course, the other related issue was
for planes to be big enough to accommodate passengers and a toilet too.
Although it appears that the first plane to be designed with a toilet was a
futuristic Russian plane developed just prior to World War 1, this was a one-off
and not repeated for another twenty years or so.
The first relatively common planes and toilets started to appear in the mid 1930s
on the magnificent flying boats. Some of these planes even had separate
male and female toilets - today's unisex trend is much more sensible, because it
avoids the otherwise inevitable problem of one gender's toilet(s) being in much
greater demand than the other gender's toilet(s).
Another development was also needed in order for us to be able to start to obtain
meaningful data on toilet/passenger ratios - planes had to start carrying enough
passengers to reasonably require multiple toilets. There's no
significance to learning that a plane that carried 15 passengers also had a
toilet - the 1:15 ratio seems great, but what alternative did the airline have?
Zero toilets? Half a toilet? You can't have a half toilet, you have to have complete
toilets.
So it is really only when we start to see passenger capacities moving up into
the 30+ realm that airlines have to start deciding when and if they add a second
toilet, and so on beyond that as the passenger capacities grow more and more.
Note this table primarily gives ratios calculated on the number of toilets
assigned to the coach class cabin. Generally there are adequate or better
than adequate ratios of toilets for business and first class cabins. We
focus exclusively on the coach class ratio because it is normal practice to
restrict the first and business class toilets to only the people in those
cabins. Rarely we'll see toilets being shared by more than one class (for
example, some AA 747s) but generally each class has its own toilets.
When calculating the coach class toilet ratio, we generally include premium
economy seating in that calculation, unless they clearly have a separate set of
toilets just for themselves (this is rare).
An Interesting Exception
Boeing's glorious glamorous SST - the 2707, which alas never made
it very much past the drawing board, had an appalling toilet
ratio, and amazingly, for both coach and first class. In a
sales brochure possibly dating to 1966, Boeing showed the plane in
three configurations - a standard longhaul configuration, a
standard shorthaul configuration, and a high density all coach
configuration.
These days it is interesting to note how much greater the
percentage of seats in the first class cabin is compared to first
class seats in planes today (although there are no business class
or premium economy class cabins yet), but the really surprising
thing is the toilet ratio. It got as bad as 1:50 - and that
is for the first class cabin as well as the coach class cabin!
While Boeing promoted the plane as being ultra-luxurious, clearly
the people promoting it as such gave no thought to one of the most
basic of passenger amenities, the toilet.
Where Do We Get This Information From?
Where possible, we provide a link to relevant source material. Recent information is
taken variously from Seatguru.com and airline websites.
It is possible that some of the links will fail in the future. However, if
we provide a link, that also means that we have sighted the information at that
link at some point in the past and have accepted it as credible, so even if the
link no longer opens, you know that we've done some quality control in the past.
Do First and Business Class Passengers Use Toilets More Frequently?
Here's an interesting question. We know the airlines never do anything
more than the absolute minimum they can get away with, an adage that is as true
for first class as it is for coach class.
So if the airlines do little more than the essential minimum for
first and business class passengers, it seems fair to say that
their toilet ratios in their premium cabins represent fair normal
toilet ratios.
If that is the case, how can the airlines justify toilet ratios
sometimes four or more times worse in coach class than in first
and business class? Do first and business class passengers
use their toilets four times more often than coach class
passengers?
Or are the airlines rudely ignoring one of life's most appreciated
courtesies - convenient access to toilet facilities - for the
majority of passengers on all the planes and flights they operate?
Short Haul - Different Rules Apply
We've tended to concentrate on planes used for long-haul flights, which we sort
of mean planes typically flown four or more hours at a time.
As we explain
in our article about
How Many Toilets Does a Plane Need, short haul flights can manage with fewer
toilets due to their short flight durations and the result that
many passengers just stoically 'hold it in' until reaching their
destination.
So it isn't entirely fair to compare what seems to be an
appallingly under-equipped 737 that is used for two hour flights
or shorter with a seemingly much better 777 used for five hour
flights or longer.
Smoking Guns
From the data we have assembled, it might seem that the last 30 years or so have
seen consistently insufficient toilets installed on planes. But even
within the general data, there are what we term some 'smoking guns' that point
to the airlines' overwhelming preference to sacrifice toilets in favor of seats,
no matter how extreme the resulting lack of toilets may be.
There are some clear examples of airlines getting greedier and meaner. In
particular, some of the airlines that recently received A380s have been re-configuring
their planes to fit in more seats, and to take out some toilets. This is
true at Emirates, Qantas and Singapore Airlines, with Emirates in particular
needing to hang their head in shame with their newer configured A380s having an
appalling 1:61 ratio for toilets to seats, one of the worst we've so far found
in long-haul widebody planes.
An Interesting Current Comparison : A380 Configurations
It can be difficult to accurately infer much from many airplane
configurations, because the airplanes themselves often have a
mixed history and may have been originally configured one way by
one airline and then sold on or leased to another airline, and the
configuration may not have been changed.
Configurations can also be 'old' - ie, they may have been in place
for five or ten years or more on the same plane, or 'new' - ie,
the plane may have just had its entire cabin area redone.
But there is one plane which provides an excellent 'apples to
apples' comparison - the A380.
All A380s are nearly new, all are long-haul planes, and all are
still owned by their original operators.
Plus, with a huge amount of cabin space and large numbers of
seats, the airlines have had a great deal of freedom and
flexibility to decide exactly what ratio of toilets to seats they
feel most appropriate.
We've accordingly listed, below, all the A380 airplane
configurations by all airlines currently (Nov 2012) flying them.
There's a wide range of ratios, from Good (China Southern 1:36;
Lufthansa and Malaysia Airlines 1:38) to Ordinary to Bad to
Appalling (Singapore, 1:50 and 1:57 and Emirates 1:61).
In other words, with the new A380 the worst airlines have 60% more
seats per coach class toilet than the best. Shame on
Emirates for such a lack of toilets, and special thanks to China
Southern for being generous with its toilet allocation.
Perceived Airline Quality No Guarantee of Toilets
Some of the world's most prestigious airlines are also some of the world's
meanest airlines when it comes to toilets. Or, to be more precise, while these
airlines might look after their first class passengers very well indeed, they
treat their coach class passengers as disdainfully as do the airlines with some
of the worst reputations.
Look no further than Emirates with its appalling 1:63 ratio on some A330s and
its 1:61 ratio on its latest A380s for an example of this.
Indeed,
Emirates (so far) seems to have the worst ratio for premium cabins too - on some
of its A330s, 54 first and business class passengers have to share two toilets
(1:27 ratio). This is about half as many toilets as some other airlines provide
for their premium passengers.
Table Color Key
< 1:36 |
Excellent |
1:36 - 1:39 |
Good |
1:40 - 1:44 |
Ordinary |
1:45 - 1:49 |
Bad |
1:50 > |
Appalling |
Table : Airplane
Seat/Toilet Ratios
Year |
Airline |
Plane |
Passengers |
Toilets |
Coach Ratio |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1950 |
Generic |
Comet |
~ 8F +36Y |
1F + 2Y? |
1:18
|
1950s-60s |
Generic |
DC-7 |
42 all F |
4 |
1:11 |
1958 |
Qantas |
707-138 |
40F, 50Y |
2F + 3Y |
1:17
|
mid 60s |
Boeing proposal |
2707 SST |
28F + 249Y for longhaul |
1F + 5Y |
1:50 |
1966 |
Qantas |
707-138 |
20F, 78-84Y |
2F + 3Y |
1:26 - 1:28
|
~ 1970s |
American |
707-100 |
14F + 123Y |
1F + 3Y |
1:41 |
1977 |
American |
707-323B |
14F + 135Y |
1F + 3Y |
1:45 |
1977 |
American |
747-100 |
66F + 330Y |
2F + 8Y |
1:41 |
1977 |
American |
DC-10-10 |
44F + 220Y |
2F + 5Y |
1:44 |
1979 |
United |
747 |
26F + 348Y |
1F + 10Y |
1:35 |
1979 |
United |
DC-10-10 |
40F + 214Y |
2F + 6Y |
1:36
|
1983 |
American |
747 |
16F + 443Y |
1F + 12Y |
1:37 |
1983 |
American |
747 |
46F + 44B + 330Y |
3F/B + 8Y |
1:41 |
1983 |
American |
DC-10 |
38F, 32B, 189Y |
2F + 2B + 5Y |
1:38 |
1983 |
American |
DC-10-30 |
26F, 28B, 186Y |
2F + 2B + 4Y |
1:47 |
1985 |
American |
DC-10-30 |
25F + 36B + 180Y |
2F + 2B + 4Y |
1:45 |
1987 |
American |
767-200 |
14F + 30B + 140Y |
1F + 0B + 4Y |
1:43 B+Y |
1987 |
American |
DC-10 |
16F + 297Y |
2F + 6Y |
1:50 |
1987 |
Continental |
747 |
24F + 446Y |
?F + 12Y |
1:37 |
1987 |
Continental |
DC-10-30 |
24F + 31B + 195Y |
2F + 2B + 4Y |
1:49 |
1987 |
Delta |
767-200 |
18F + 186Y |
1F + 4Y |
1:47 |
1987 |
Delta |
L1011 |
12F + 54B + 203Y |
2F + 2B + 5Y |
1:41 |
1987 |
Delta |
L1011 |
28F + 48B + 199Y |
2F/B + 5Y |
1:40 |
1987 |
Delta |
L1011 |
32F + 270Y dom |
2F + 5Y |
1:54 |
1987 |
Delta |
L1011-500 |
12F + 40B + 189Y |
2F + 1B + 5Y |
1:38 |
1987 |
Delta |
DC-8-60 |
18F + 194Y |
2F + 4Y |
1:49 |
1987 |
Delta |
DC-10 |
36F + 248Y |
2F + 7Y |
1:35 |
1987 |
Eastern |
DC-10-30 |
12F, 36B, 200Y |
2F + 2B + 4Y |
1:50 |
1987 |
Eastern |
L1011 |
28F + 288Y |
2F + 5Y |
1:58 |
1987 |
Northwest |
747 |
18F + 48B + 334Y |
5F/B + 8Y |
1:42 |
1987 |
Northwest |
757-200 |
14F + 170Y |
1F + 3Y |
1:57 |
1987 |
Northwest |
DC10-40 |
18F + 266Y |
1F + 6Y |
1:44 |
1987 |
Pan Am |
747 |
21F + 44B + 347Y |
3F/B + 10Y |
1:35 |
1987 |
Piedmont |
767-200ER |
25B + 185Y |
1F + 4Y |
1:46 |
1987 |
TWA |
747-100 |
21F + 52B + 358Y |
3F/B + 8Y |
1:45 |
1987 |
TWA |
767-200 |
15F + 40B + 129Y |
1F + 2B + 2Y |
1:65 |
1987 |
TWA |
L1011 |
18F + 40B + 214Y |
2F/B + 5Y |
1:43 |
1987 |
United (ex PA) |
747-200 |
35F + 100B + 212Y |
4F/B + 8Y |
1:27 |
1987 |
United |
767-200 |
24F + 180Y |
1F + 4Y |
1:45 |
1987 |
United |
DC-8-70 |
26F + 174Y |
1F + 2? +2Y |
1:44 if 4 |
1987 |
United (ex PA) |
L1011-500 |
36F + 32B + 140Y |
2F + 2B + 4Y |
1:35 |
1987 |
World Airways |
DC-10-30 |
354Y |
9Y |
1:39 |
1980s |
Cathay Pacific |
747-200 |
35F + 92B + 236Y |
1F + 3B + 6Y |
1:39 |
1988 |
Cathay Pacific |
747-400 |
30F + 103B + 230Y |
2F + 5B + 6Y |
1:38 |
1989 |
Cathay Pacific |
747-300 |
29F + 63B + 330Y |
2F + 3B + 8Y |
1:41 |
1989 |
Pan Am |
747 |
40F 48B 259Y |
10Y |
1:26 |
late 80s - 92 |
American |
747SP |
29F + 78B + 78Y |
2F + 5B + 4Y |
1:20
|
1990s |
United |
DC-10-10 |
28F + 259Y |
2F + 6Y |
1:43
|
< 2003 |
Northwest |
DC-10 |
40F + 196Y |
2F + 5Y |
1:39 |
< 2010 |
Northwest |
747 |
32F + 33Y sharing with F, and 304Y not sharing |
8Y |
1:38 |
< 2010 |
Northwest |
A330 |
34B + 264Y |
2B + 6Y |
1:44 |
1990s |
BA & AF |
Concorde |
92 - 104 |
3 |
1:31 - 1:35 |
1995 |
United |
777-200 |
12F + 49B + 231Y |
2F + 2B + 6Y |
1:39 |
1998 |
United |
767-300 |
10F + 38B + 158Y |
2F + 2B + 4Y |
1:40 |
1998 |
United |
747-400 |
36F + 123B + 142Y |
5F? + 4B + 4Y |
1:36
|
2008 |
Air Canada |
777-200 |
42F + 228Y |
3F + 5Y |
1:46 |
< 2012 |
Delta |
767-300 |
24F + 230Y |
1F + 5Y |
1:46
|
2012 |
Air NZ |
747-400 |
46B + 39PE + 294Y |
2B + 2B/PE + 10Y |
1:29 |
2012 |
Air NZ |
777-200 |
26B + 36PE + 242Y |
3B + 7PE/Y |
1:40 |
2012 |
Air NZ |
777-300 |
44B + 44PE + 244Y |
3B + 2PE + 6Y |
1:41 |
2012 |
Emirates |
A330-200 |
27B + 251Y |
2B + 4Y |
1:63 |
2012 |
Emirates |
A330-200 |
12F + 42B + 183Y |
2F/B + 4Y |
1:46 |
2012 |
Etihad |
A330-200 |
22B + 240Y |
2B + 6Y |
1:40 |
2012 |
Etihad |
A330-200 |
10F + 26B + 164Y |
2F + 2B + 4Y |
1:41 |
2012 |
Etihad |
A330-200 |
12F + 24B + 180Y |
2F + 2B + 4Y |
1:45 |
2012 |
Eva Air |
A330-200 |
24B + 228Y |
2B + 6Y |
1:38 |
2012 |
KLM |
A330-200 |
30B + 257Y |
2B + 5Y |
1:51
|
2012 - older |
Air France |
A380 |
9F + 80B + 449Y |
2F + 4B + 10Y |
1:45 |
2012 - newer |
Air France |
A380 |
9F + 62B + 38PE + 407Y |
2F + 4B + 9Y |
1:45 |
2012 |
China Southern |
A380 |
8F + 70B + 428Y |
1F + 3B + 12Y |
1:36 |
2012 - older |
Emirates |
A380 |
14F + 76B + 399Y |
9Y |
1:44 |
2012 - newer |
Emirates |
A380 |
14F + 76B + 427Y |
7Y |
1:61 |
2012 |
Korean Air |
A380 |
12F + 94B + 301Y |
2F + 5B + 7Y |
1:43 |
2012 |
Lufthansa |
A380 |
8F + 98B + 420Y |
11Y |
1:38 |
2012 |
Malaysia Airlines |
A380 |
8F + 66B + 420Y |
3F + 4B + 11Y |
1:38 |
2012 - older |
Qantas |
A380 |
14F + 72B + 32PE + 332Y (all on lower deck) |
8Y |
1:42 |
2012 - newer |
Qantas |
A380 |
14F + 64B + 35PE + 371Y (341 on lower deck) |
7Y lower deck |
1:49 on lower deck |
2012 - older |
Singapore Airlines |
A380 |
12F + 60B + 399Y (some on each level) |
8Y |
1:50 |
2012 - newer |
Singapore Airlines |
A380 |
12F + 60B + 399Y (all on lower deck) |
7Y |
1:57 |
2012 |
Thai Airways |
A380 |
12F + 60B + 435Y |
10Y
|
1:44 |
2012 |
Aeroflot |
767-300 |
30B + 199Y |
2B + 2Y |
1:100 |
2012 |
Aeroflot |
A330-200 |
34B + 207Y |
2B + 6Y |
1:35 |
2012 |
Aeroflot |
IL96-200 |
22B + 261Y |
2B + 6Y |
1:44 |
2012 |
ANA |
787 |
46B + 112Y |
3B + 3Y |
1:37 |
|
Notes
Sometimes it has not been
clear which cabin a particular toilet is designated for.
We've tried to make the best guess we can in such cases, or
alternatively have shown them as being shared among several
cabins.
Sometimes poor scans of
airplane layouts has made it difficult to ascertain how many
toilets are in a block of toilets. Again we've attempted to
make the best guess we can as to the count.
If you have information to the
contrary, and can correct or enhance any of our results, please
let us know.
Summary
Although some of the very early planes
definitely had great toilet/seat ratios, the concept of cutting
back on toilets is clearly nothing new - with the first time a
toilet/seat ratio of 1:50 or worse occurring being revealed in a
1987 seating chart for an Eastern Airlines L1011 (1:58) and
several other airlines and planes also revealing worse than 1:50
ratios at that time too.
Distressingly (in all meanings of the word)
the new A380 super jumbo planes - airplanes that the airlines
originally dreamed fancifully of including lounges, shopping
arcades, bars and other amenities in, show that no matter how big
the plane may be, airlines consistently choose more seats over
more comfort.
There can be considerable differences
between planes when you choose your airline and flight, so if this
is an important factor to you, you should check out the
toilet/seat ratio as part of your overall flight selection
process.
For more insight into this topic, please
also see our article
How Many Restrooms Are Enough on a Plane?
Related Articles, etc
|
If so, please donate to keep the website free and fund the addition of more articles like this. Any help is most appreciated - simply click below to securely send a contribution through a credit card and Paypal.
|
Originally published
16 Nov 2012, last update
30 May 2021
You may freely reproduce or distribute this article for noncommercial purposes as long as you give credit to me as original writer.
|