It’s an exciting day for Qantas, sort of, as the airline is putting its first Airbus A321XLRs into service. These planes will be used to refresh the carrier’s domestic product, and will eventually become the backbone of Qantas’ narrow body fleet. However, one aspect of the passenger experience on these planes is getting a lot of attention, and not in a good way.
In this post:
Qantas’ A321XLRs have the industry’s worst lavatory ratio
Qantas Airbus A321XLRs are equipped with 200 seats, including 20 business class seats and 180 economy class seats. In total, the plane has three lavatories, with one being at the front of the cabin, reserved for business class, and two being at the back of the plane, reserved for economy class.
With just two lavatories for 180 economy passengers, that means there’s one lavatory for every 90 passengers. Now, I imagine the average traveler doesn’t have a good sense of what a good passenger to lavatory ratio is, so let me explain — this is among the worst ratios you’ll find in the industry.
If you look at the plane overall, three lavatories for 200 passengers might not be terrible, since that’s one lavatory for every 67 passengers. But since the forward lavatory is reserved for business class, economy on this plane might just have the worst lavatory ratio in the entire airline industry.
I can’t think of any airline that has a worse ratio, but if I’m missing any, please do let me know. For context, the standard on full service airlines operating the A321 family of aircraft is to have at least three economy lavatories, with one lavatory toward the front of the cabin, and two lavatories at the back of the plane. For example, below is the seat map for Delta’s A321neo.
Qantas A321XLRs are largely replacing Boeing 737-800s, which have two economy lavatories for 162 passengers, so that’s one lavatory for every 81 passengers. That’s also quite bad, but obviously adding an extra 18 seats without adding any lavatories makes this even worse. I feel sorry for the queues, as there will likely be a never-ending queue of passengers waiting to use the lavatory.
As another example, ultra low cost carrier Wizzair has a staggering 239 seats on its A321neos, and has three lavatories, so that’s a ratio of one lavatory for (roughly) every 80 passengers. Thanks to the airline being an all-economy operator, all lavatories are open to all passengers.
This is so bad that Qantas plans to reverse course
Airlines are of course always trying to maximize their LOPAs (which stands for “layout of passenger accommodations”), which typically involves cramming as many seats or seating products into a plane as possible. Of course that has to be balanced with offering an experience that passengers will actually tolerate and pay for.
Qantas really pushed its luck with these A321XLRs, and one certainly wonders how so many people signed off on this layout without noting that the lavatory situation was a step too far. So along those lines, Qantas actually has plans to reverse course on this strategy:
- The first three A321XLRs will be delivered with this 200-seat layout
- In the coming months, the airline will start taking delivery of A321XLRs with an additional toilet right behind business class, which will come at the expense of a row of three economy seats
- The three A321XLRs delivered with the 200-seat layout will be retrofitted with that extra lavatory in a few years
- This means that the updated A321XLRs will have three lavatories for 177 economy passengers, so that’s one lavatory for every 59 passengers
Bottom line
Qantas’ brand new Airbus A321XLRs have taken to the skies. While there’s a lot to like about these planes, the lavatory ratio isn’t among them, as there are just two lavatories for 180 economy passengers. I can’t think of any airline that has a worse lavatory ratio, though if I’m missing any, please let me know!
This decision was so bad that Qantas is already reversing course. Starting with the fourth A321XLR, the airline plans to remove a set of three economy seats, and add an additional lavatory.
What do you make of Qantas’ A321XLR lavatory situation?
How much more mileage is the media going to make over this?
Obviously it was a decision made by the previous CEO. The new CEO is aware of it and admitted it's not acceptable and as a result, the first 3 aircraft will only be used on domestic short haul. Aeroplanes 4 onward will have the extra toilet, which will be retrofitted on VH-OGA, OGB and OGC.
There are only 16 A321XLR that...
How much more mileage is the media going to make over this?
Obviously it was a decision made by the previous CEO. The new CEO is aware of it and admitted it's not acceptable and as a result, the first 3 aircraft will only be used on domestic short haul. Aeroplanes 4 onward will have the extra toilet, which will be retrofitted on VH-OGA, OGB and OGC.
There are only 16 A321XLR that will be used on anything approaching long haul as they will have lie-flat business class seats.
This article is one of a number that just keep bashing QF for this when they have clearly admitted it isn't acceptable and moved to correct it.
Media never let the facts get in the way of a good story or an over-exaggerated headline/clickbait.
I am a type 2 diabetic 162 seats and 2 toilets is bad enough 180 is shocking add in the time toilets are unavailable with food service. Not a nice way to travel. warren Elliot.
For god sake, the aircraft will only be used short haul (1 hour or so) until they are modified. Every one of the remaining 45 aircraft will have the extra toilet.
Air New Zealand A321 Neo planes that fly trans Tasman are shocking in this respect. After seatbelt signs have been lit, then turned off, the planes become completely dysfunctional at times due to pent up bathroom demand. These are for 3 & 4 hour flights. So called full service carrier
I think this is so disrespectful to the passengers. And it's not just Qantas. The old AA 757 used to have a bathroom mid-forward (say around row 10-14???) as well as 2 in the rear. If one of those lav's becomes inoperable or a passenger needs considerably more time, this is serious downside.
As if Qantas really care about the flying passages down the the back,Qantas mangers and all the other staff use the front 20 seats.Great planning for themselves Qantas
Once we work out what 'passages' are and 'mangers' will be able to more accurately respond. However, there are no plans to use the first three aircraft on anything other than Melbourne to Sydney type flights until additional toilet is fitted. All remaining A321XLRs will have the extra toilet off the production line.
As for what complete waffle you're on about with the front 20 seats I have no idea. I don't work for...
Once we work out what 'passages' are and 'mangers' will be able to more accurately respond. However, there are no plans to use the first three aircraft on anything other than Melbourne to Sydney type flights until additional toilet is fitted. All remaining A321XLRs will have the extra toilet off the production line.
As for what complete waffle you're on about with the front 20 seats I have no idea. I don't work for Qantas but people who do tell me that they don't bother with staff travel anymore because its impossible to get upgraded or even get on a flight these days.
Qantas needs another type of ticket which toilet is not included.
It’s certainly feels cheap to me without a TV screen….
Hope QF just put this XLR for domestic market only or just let Jetstar to do the job!
United’s 787s used to operate SFO-SIN route.
Just as bad!!
That’s why they’re profitable.
Best answer for this problem is astronaut diapers or for children some pampers. They could be issued when you check in at service counter.
This is an article where Ben's last section heading: "Bottom line" is absolutely appropriate :)
Actually this isn’t correct.
British Airways A321 Neo and Ceo has a worse ratio. Since the cabin configuration is adjustable, the maximum economy cabin is 200, with 12 business class seats.
So FWD toilet reserved for business class.
Two aft toilets for economy. 1 toilet per 100 guests.
Always a queue down the aisle.
For god sake must we perpetuate this silly nonsense of calling passengers 'guests'?
A stupid and nonsensical bit of BS started by the arch BS artist, Branson.
A man who parrots endlessly about how to treat staff but experience shows if you speak to people who work in one of his companies, they tend to be quite toxic and he is never seen when the chips are down, only when there's some new...
For god sake must we perpetuate this silly nonsense of calling passengers 'guests'?
A stupid and nonsensical bit of BS started by the arch BS artist, Branson.
A man who parrots endlessly about how to treat staff but experience shows if you speak to people who work in one of his companies, they tend to be quite toxic and he is never seen when the chips are down, only when there's some new product being launched or to spout some BS about how he saved the world.
One of the highest rated airlines in the world is Air NZ and they call their passengers, passengers.
A guest is someone you invite to your house for dinner, you don't charge them for the meal or to enter your house.
You can blame the recently-jettisoned, penny-pinching Irishman for this wrong decision (and literally everything else that went wrong with Qantas). The lesson has finally sunk in with Australia's aviation community: if you want a successful low cost carrier (JetStar), hire an Irishman! If you want to ruin your full service carrier (Qantas), also hire an Irishman!!
For the very long flights this would be a problem but I would assume anywhere in Australia or NZ would be ok.
Korean Air has 737-900s (non ER) which have 1 bathroom for 8 business class passengers, and 2 bathrooms for 180 economy class passengers, but these planes are used on shorter flights (either domestic ones which are around 1 hour long or shorter international flights) where bathroom usage would likely be lower.
At least Qantas realized its mistake and is changing the layout. The original (200 seats, 3 lavs) is absurd.
On a lot of long-haul narrow-body flights, it's really difficult for people to cycle out to the restroom at all (it's crowded, everybody has their stuff out, the ceiling isn't full height). Now imagine having to wait for availability with 90 folks that also need to. Now add in some turbulence and extended seatbelts-required time....
At least Qantas realized its mistake and is changing the layout. The original (200 seats, 3 lavs) is absurd.
On a lot of long-haul narrow-body flights, it's really difficult for people to cycle out to the restroom at all (it's crowded, everybody has their stuff out, the ceiling isn't full height). Now imagine having to wait for availability with 90 folks that also need to. Now add in some turbulence and extended seatbelts-required time. Really unpleasant, and a recipe for kidney stones for folks who might choose dehydration over discomfort...
Yes, that seems to elude the media and most of the posters on here who are going for the cheap shot.
Just adding to this article, ANA's a321neo's also feature a similar issue: 2 economy lavs with 1 business lav. The problem is that ANA has a much smaller business cabin than Qantas (8 seats vs. 20 seats), so they actually have 186 passengers fighting for 2 toilets at an average of 93 per toilet, so actually slightly worse than Qantas!
@RJ - those ANA A21Ns are domestic-only. Thus most of their flights would be around an hour at most, and a bit longer when flying to Okinawa or on some other routes. In most cases, there would be almost no need to visit toilet on these flights.
SO ARE THE QANTAS A321XLRs until they have the extra toilet fitted. the 4th through to the 48th aircraft will have the extra toilet.
Qantas has said they will only operate them on short haul until they are modified.
Did no one read the article? I mean, don't blame those who skimmed over it as the media never lets the facts get in the way of a good story, or the opportunity for click bait.
Qantas Link has E195s with 84-88 Y pax sharing one lav. I would contend that's worse in that that one really dude scrolling on his phone really screws things up.
Any thoughts on why airplanes don't just install an extra urinal-only lavatory for men? Would cut down on bathroom lines and not take up too much space.
Doesn't Lufthansa have some of those?
@glenn t - on their A380 first class. The thing is that this is inside the normal lavatory, so the forementioned advantages Pam Thickett mentioned aren't there.
You will find even more couldn't-care-less Y passengers will be invading the Business cabin to use their lavatory. Some cabin crew run interference, but most do not.
Not a Qantas fan at all but..
I don’t think the airline is reversing course as such.
A massive proportion of these planes will be on the the Sydney-Melbourne a S Sydney-Brisbane routes, both roughly an hour. I have travelled these routes very frequently and surprisingly there is hardly a queue for the WC given how short the flight is (probably 30-40 mins tops between seat belt sign going off and on again).
Not a Qantas fan at all but..
I don’t think the airline is reversing course as such.
A massive proportion of these planes will be on the the Sydney-Melbourne a S Sydney-Brisbane routes, both roughly an hour. I have travelled these routes very frequently and surprisingly there is hardly a queue for the WC given how short the flight is (probably 30-40 mins tops between seat belt sign going off and on again).
I am a restless traveller so will always choose an aisle seat and take a trip to the WC but I cannot remember the last time I had to let the middle or window passengers out. With free wifi on these flights, most people just pass the hour on their phones.
Th carrier is aware of this problem and the next deliveries have already been allocated with 3 lavatories at the rear , these first couple were switched out with a Jetstar order.. and I believe they will also have flat beds in business class
I've heard of yellow journalism but this is r
Qantas has not recovered from the mean airline it became under Alan Joyce. Flying across Australia from Brisbane to Perth (about 5.5 hours) in the current Qantas 737, the toilet issue is already significant. Even on the 737 two economy toilets is insufficient for anything more than a short flight. Crew and pax haggling over the front toilet use is common. Why QF are waiting “for several years” to retrofit the first three Airbus is...
Qantas has not recovered from the mean airline it became under Alan Joyce. Flying across Australia from Brisbane to Perth (about 5.5 hours) in the current Qantas 737, the toilet issue is already significant. Even on the 737 two economy toilets is insufficient for anything more than a short flight. Crew and pax haggling over the front toilet use is common. Why QF are waiting “for several years” to retrofit the first three Airbus is beyond comprehension. The toilet ratio should never have been approved in the first place.
I might not like it when people from economy queue in business class for the front lav, clutching on to the business seats, but I understand, when you have to go, you have to go! With so few lavs what are you going to do.
QF announced they will be using these Airbuses on the Perth route. Mad. Mind you, Virgin’s high capacity 737 Max is not much better - same issue on longer flights.
What's to haggle about? The people sitting up the front paid anything from $1800 to $3000 for their seats. They're entitled to a lav of their own. Economy passengers use the loos at the rear. Sheesh... Aussies are getting as belligerent and entitled as Americans. Bring back the curtain!
Because they are getting 48 of them and 45 will have the extra toilet and the first three will be used on Sydney to Melbourne type routes until modified.
All a lot of hoopla about nothing.
Lucky, wait til you see Philippine Airlines’ A321ceo (bi-class) fleet. 2 bathrooms for 187 economy seats which is basically an average of 93-94 passengers per toilet. I know they are starting to retrofit the planes at the moment, but even those will have an average of 91 economy passengers per toilet (182 total economy seats).
https://www.philippineairlines.com/ph/en/inflight-experience/airfleet/airfleet-plane-list/pal-operating-fleet/airbus-a321ceo-bi-class.html
These planes were originally ordered for Jetstar and QF group re-allocated them to Qantas (swapped some deliveries around as Qantas had later delivery slots).
Seats are easy to switch in and out (by design), but the plumbing for toilets requires more work in advance which couldn't be changed at the time of the switch.
Big nothing story, it's not ideal but it's also not like Qantas had chosen ordered these specifically with 2 Y lavs.
Most Delta 763’s have between 32-42 lavs.
I see what you're doing here.
But is the lavs premium and profitable?
For your answer, ask Tim Dunn, who knows everything about Delta, and then some.
So is Qantas the only airline that completely restricts the forward lav to economy pax? I think this is an overreach. By using your logic, all single aisle aircraft then only have 2 lav's in economy. Occasionally a 3rd.
They're not the only airline but im glad they're one that do restrict.
Qantas clearly taking the piss at customer’s expense. You’ve been Joyced!
Yeh, lets not mention the two Virgin flights that departed on medium sectors with lavs not working and refused to divert anywhere. The most recent example (you'd think they'd learn from the first time) had people peeing in water bottles and in sinks and one elderly lady allegedly suffered the indignity of wetting herself.
Nothing about it in the media except for a small article in one newspaper. If it was Qantas, there'd be demands for a Royal Commission.
You really are determined to hate on Qantas. Any other airline it'd be "kudos to management for recognising this is a problem and fixing it".
Touche. This guy has a shot at QF at any chance.
I totally agree - clearly ..and having read many reviews the hate is palpable
Also you ALWAYS hear of airlines profits but apparently $2.39billion from Qantas wasn’t enough for a mention from Ben or did I miss that !
It’s the decision of previous ceo Joyce; he gutted the airline and won record profits thus insane bonus cheques. Left under a massive cloud after sacking ground crew in Covid; courts spanked them massively. Trashed brand slowly rebuilding.
I'd like some clarity on the phrase "reserved for Business class". It's my understanding that USA actually has regulations barring passengers from visiting a cabin they're not ticketed in (for "security" reasons, naturally), while most other countries treat lavatories as shared resources for all passengers. I doubt very much that Qantas bars Y pax from the forward lav. I really doubt that Economy pax in row 12 will be forced to wait for the cart...
I'd like some clarity on the phrase "reserved for Business class". It's my understanding that USA actually has regulations barring passengers from visiting a cabin they're not ticketed in (for "security" reasons, naturally), while most other countries treat lavatories as shared resources for all passengers. I doubt very much that Qantas bars Y pax from the forward lav. I really doubt that Economy pax in row 12 will be forced to wait for the cart and queue for the one aft lav.
But quibbles aside, as a 60s guy who's "aware of his prostate" and loves brown beverages, this plane is a hard pass for me, in any cabin.
@ DenB -- For what it's worth, the only time there are regulations in the United States regarding which cabin you can be in is situations where you're on an international flight bound for the United States. Otherwise airlines set their own policies.
Just learn to catheterize yourself before flying. In fact I'm surprised the airlines don't make it mandatory and remove toilets altogether.
No blocking problems and they could get in a few more seats.
Too bad mate. You need to wait. I don't want all the extra foot traffic of people going through business class to use the loo. Ive paid extra for the privilege of priority, space, etc.
You actually missed one. Philippine Airlines' A321-200 fleet actually also have three lavatories, one for Business Class and two for Economy Class.
Surely this was done based on customer feedback and it’s what customers wanted.
At Qantas? LOL! As I said below, they're a low-rent operation. Profitability takes precedence over passenger comfort and convenience. They're not as hapless as Lufti yet, but they're getting there.
BS. They are adding an extra toilet after customer consultation so stop peddling nonsense.
TWICE in the last few months Virgin has flown aeroplanes with NO WORKING TOILETS, resulting in a flight from Bali where people were having to pee in water bottles and in sinks and one elderly lady suffered the indignity of wetting herself in public.
They KNEW the problem existed and departed on a 6 hour flight regardless and this...
BS. They are adding an extra toilet after customer consultation so stop peddling nonsense.
TWICE in the last few months Virgin has flown aeroplanes with NO WORKING TOILETS, resulting in a flight from Bali where people were having to pee in water bottles and in sinks and one elderly lady suffered the indignity of wetting herself in public.
They KNEW the problem existed and departed on a 6 hour flight regardless and this was the second occasion it had happened. Talk about low rent.
As usual, virtually nothing in the media about it at all.
This seems a total non-issue and just a headline grabber. BA and KLM have the same number of bathrooms on their A321s and similar number of passengers. As others have noted Qantas does not have a curtain to prevent economy passengers moving forward into the business cabin and forward toilet so the ratio is actually better.
BA, KLM, AF, LH fly routes that are mostly 1-2.5 hours with a very small % routes longer than 3 hours. QF fly bunch of routes of 4+ hours. Few need to use the lavatory for a 60-90 minutes flight.
Actually BA fly quite a few 3+ hour routes with this 3 lav A321... Greece (Athens, Crete, Corfu, etc), Turkey (Istanbul, Antalya, Bodrum, Dalaman), Jordan (Amman), Egypt (Cairo), Morocco (Marrakesh), Canary Islands (Tenerife, Lanzarote, Gran Canara), Georgia (Tbilisi) and sure I've missed some.
Probably more 3+ hour routes using A321 than Qantas will.
Herr Spohr wishes to thank Qantas for the next new Lufthansa customer initiative.
Breeze has just one in the back of their E195 & despite that they (boldly) offer free beer
Whether this is a problem or not really Depends.
The front lav isn’t in practice reserved for business class pax.
QF doesn’t have a curtain between the cabins and I’ve never seen an FA stop Y pax using the from lav. Would also mostly be culturally unacceptable for to not let Y pax use the front lav is both of the back ones are occupied
It's absolutely culturally acceptable, and enforcement is down to the FAs. It certainly does need to be enforced. Rigorously. Bring back the curtain.
I regularly see QF FA telling Y passengers they can’t use the front lav when they try to sneak in there. And it’s announced on every flight that Y passengers have 2 lavs at the back
Rightly so.
The worst Long Haul plane for washrooms is Air Canada and 2 of its 777-300 with 450 seats and limited washrooms. It insanity because it's on 10+ hour flights
Another reason why the A321XLR is nothing more than an industrial waste.
If something benefits an airline, that benefit is on the passenger's burden.
Keep talking about how these thin planes allow thin air routes to be possible. Yeah, no. 90:1 passenger to toilet is just a nonsense.
I'd much happily take a stopover option over this nonsense any day of the week, no questions asked.
Brag about the pointless numerics to...
Another reason why the A321XLR is nothing more than an industrial waste.
If something benefits an airline, that benefit is on the passenger's burden.
Keep talking about how these thin planes allow thin air routes to be possible. Yeah, no. 90:1 passenger to toilet is just a nonsense.
I'd much happily take a stopover option over this nonsense any day of the week, no questions asked.
Brag about the pointless numerics to make it look better. It's funny some guys keep yapping on that, when it's clear they haven't even seen one, let alone having set their foot inside of it.
Some brainwashed gooners like AeroB13a will love that, I guess.
Not sure how the passenger to toilet ratio is on the plane type
@betterbub
Because every airline that actually cares about the passenger experience/comfort is smart enough to not invest a single cent into this waste.
So yes, it is on the plane type because these are only ordered by the airlines who don't care about that.
Essentially the same effect.
The aircraft type is able to accommodate a mid-cabin lav, which also acts as a divider between cabin classes, but since Qantas is a low-rent operation that specialises in immiserating their customers, why would they do that when it takes up the space of six seats?
This is why I love JAL: 787-9, 44J, 35W, 116Y (195 total - less seats than this airbus!) w/ 7 toilets!
I remember when I started my flying career with British Airways (many many moons ago).
They decided they would have a dedicated sub-fleet of 747-400's without a flight attendant rest facility and designated this aircraft the '747-400 Lite'.
The theory was, the aircraft would be lighter hence cheaper to operate. They would only put it on shorter long haul routes (such as London to East Coast US) where the flight attendants do not require horizontal...
I remember when I started my flying career with British Airways (many many moons ago).
They decided they would have a dedicated sub-fleet of 747-400's without a flight attendant rest facility and designated this aircraft the '747-400 Lite'.
The theory was, the aircraft would be lighter hence cheaper to operate. They would only put it on shorter long haul routes (such as London to East Coast US) where the flight attendants do not require horizontal rest.
Of course it was a huge flop. A 747-400 rostered say London - Hong Kong would be swapped out due to a tech issue and the only spare 747 would be one of the 'lites' with no FA rest. So, BA would have to down grade 8 business class passengers each sector to allow the crew horizontal rest.
After a year and a half of this ridiculousness someone decided to just get the 'lites' back to Boeing and fitted with a crew rest facility.
In the end, it cost more to have the aircraft retrofitted than if they had just fitted them with crew rest from delivery.
See this kinda thing happening again and again.
Who comes up with these terrible ideas at BA? It seems to be a culture of bad decisions at the airline.
It's a surprise that LH didn't do this too.
Doesn't anyone else see the problem?
Downgrade 8 premium paying passengers because some mob leader blackmails the airline so members can crush candies while horizontally?
I have full respect for your occupation but if my office chair is broken, I don't go home and refuse to work unless my proper replacement chair arrives.
Its an EASA regulation, nothing to do with the airline, staff or union.
This may amaze you, but the rest of the world does not always work in accordance with how things are done in the US.
Condor A321 neo: 3 toillets for 233 pax, if one toillet for Businnes pax, so for remaining 210pax 2 toillets..
Qantas does not one little bit about passengers. We are just there to make more money for them. This just highlights how badly they treat their customers.
And yet they are not going to use these three airframes on anything more than short haul until modified and the other 45 will have extra toilet.
Sounds like you're just joining in the crowd and whinging for no reason.
Virgin operated two flights with no toilets, not learning from the feedback from he first disaster and yet nothing in the media about it. People peeing in sinks and water bottles and one...
And yet they are not going to use these three airframes on anything more than short haul until modified and the other 45 will have extra toilet.
Sounds like you're just joining in the crowd and whinging for no reason.
Virgin operated two flights with no toilets, not learning from the feedback from he first disaster and yet nothing in the media about it. People peeing in sinks and water bottles and one person wetting themselves. If that was Qantas there'd be demands for a Royal Commission.
My one memory of a toilet problem on a Qantas aircraft, which occurred after take off, the aircraft diverted. On both occasions, one of them a 6 hour sector, Virgin didn't divert despite there being options.
Lufthansa has 3 toilets on its 200 seater 321s, yet I do not recall your outraged article about that.
Feel free to elaborate on the longest routes they fly and compare that to the A321XLR nonsense routemap Qantas published.
Incase you forgot, Qantas has repeatedly said that future configurations will even feature lie-flat seats for longer routes to Asia. I wouldn't be surprised if QF may have picked up aircraft that were meant for a different airline.
Either way, such a fuss about about just 3 planes just doesn't make sense. And LH flies these planes on longer routes to the canaries etc.
the longest QF will be east coast to west coast but those flights are long enough that people can spread their time to visit the toilet. majority of the QF flights will be the golden triangle between SYD, MEL and BNE, so mostly 1 hour, maximum 2. on these flights most people do not need to use the toilets at all.
At the moment... but they have signalled they would like to use them on near-Asia flight, eg Bali. I do not know why they got XLRs to just operate the triangle. Seems big over-spec. Even for Perth or Auckland.
Air France A321: If first 300 rows are Business class, then it’s 2 restrooms for 200 Y passengers…
First 3 rows
Lufthansa A321 Neo: 215 seats and four toilets or let’s assume 203 seats in economy and 3 toilets.
If I were Carsten I would eliminate one toilette and allow the first 12 rows to use the forward one.
sounds like doug parker strikes again on unnecessary LOPA retrofits due to a lack of critical thinking in the design phase
Well, I am glad they are reversing this. The airline greed for profits has become insane.
One of the reasons that I travel in business class, apart from the flat bed, is better access to lavatories. And no, I do not have any medical condition. But sometimes situations on planes regarding toilets are just ludicrous.
Back in time, A340-600 was my favourite for travel in economy class, just because of lavatories arrangement.
With all those bathrooms downstairs, right? That was absolutely the best set up.
Those 2 restrooms are getting more use than a horny Hollywood celebrity.
I don't think it's such a big deal. KLM also has just 2 lavs for more than 200 passengers on the A321neo. KLM has a total of 227 seats.
BA is not too far behind with 220 seats.
I can't imagine what those lavs look like in the last couple of hours of flight. The women that don't have the luxury of standing and not needing to touch any of the "surfaces."
QANTAS hates passengers, and that is not an extreme statement. Alan Joyce, and now Vanessa Hudson, care not one jot for their customers. They are pitiful.
If they plan to save space, why not add a urinal? Unless it's more expensive or what am I missing? I would prefer a urinal rather than having to open and close the lid and clean it for the next person.
And since coffee culture is part of Australia, you're really going to need to go to the loo as coffee acts as a diuretic.
"If they plan to save space, why not add a urinal? Unless it's more expensive or what am I missing?"
Women don't have penises is what you're missing.
I know that, but I can find it beneficial as you're in and out within minutes if not seconds for gents.
There's only one toilet for more than 100 passengers in LATAM's A319.
Aussies love to take the piss